miket@brspyr1.UUCP (06/03/88)
Following a spirited argument with a friend, I'm interested in learning about
the relative value, or lack of value, of electronic insect killers, commonly
referred to as "bug zappers" or "bug lights." The manufacturers have done a
pretty good job of convincing us all that the ultraviolet light of these
zappers attracts nasties from all over your yard, which are then nicely fried
by some God-awful amperage.
The question arises: are these zappers a big scam?
Possibilities raised (conjecture only):
A. The zappers actually make the situation worse. Although many insects are
attracted by the light, only a small percentage get close enough to be
terminated. Insects are complex creatures of many differing species, with
widely differing habits. Many may be mildly interested in the light and may
drop by for a casual visit with no intention of actually getting close to the
light, and may be easily distracted by the presence of some nice tasty human.
This seems to be borne out by the astonishing variety and diversity of the
insect world.
B. Insects that we normally think of as outdoor "pests" (that is, those that
bite) are not attracted by ultraviolet light. The only insects that are fried
are those that are harmless anyway--moths, mayflies, June bugs, and the like.
In particular, some biting insects may only be attracted by carbon dioxide
(exhaust from animals), heat from animal skin surfaces, or animal scents.
This seems to be borne out by examination of the zappers and examination of the
habits of mosquitoes, black flies, punkies, etc., which don't seem to care one
way or the other about lights of any type.
B (1). Many of the insects obliterated may actually be beneficial insects in
some ways, and could even be species that prey on those very insects we are
trying to eliminate. No real evidence to back this up.
C. Although the constant sound of zapping may be very gratifying to the owner,
the number of insects terminated represents about 0.0001% of those in the
immediate area. This seems to be borne out by simple statistics.
I'd like to see some hard evidence confronting this topic. Have there been any
serious studies made? Do entomologists break out in laughter when anybody
mentions a bug zapper? My apologies if this has been discussed before.
Let's see some serious information on this from those who know. If anybody has
any good, solid, empirical data, please e-mail me a summary. Although a
sprited discussion of this on the net would be lots of fun, my access to the
net is severely restricted and I probably would see very little of it.
Go ahead and discuss it on the net if you wish, but please e-mail me the best
information. I'm not interested in receiving e-mail theories or
diatribes--just the facts, ma'am.
--
Michael Trout (miket@brspyr1) =-=-=-=-=-=-= UUCP:brspyr1!miket
BRS Information Technologies, 1200 Rt. 7, Latham, N.Y. 12110 (518) 783-1161
. . . .... .........:.::::.:::::::::.:::::::::::::::::::::::::::o
"By and large, I was only trying to fool Mr. Trout." -Dan Ratherglenda@homxb.UUCP (G.CHILDRESS) (06/03/88)
In article <3637@brspyr1.BRS.Com>, miket@brspyr1.BRS.Com (Mike Trout) writes: > I'm interested in learning about the relative value, or lack of value, of > electronic insect killers, commonly referred to as "bug zappers" or "bug > lights." The manufacturers have done a pretty good job of convincing us > all that the ultraviolet light of these ... My local paper had an article on these devices yesterday. All of what I'm writing is from that article. (A few entomologists were consulted.) Since these zappers were introduced, US consumers have spent over 300 million dollars on them. At ~ 35$ each, that's a lot of zappers. > A. The zappers actually make the situation worse. Although many insects are > attracted by the light, only a small percentage get close enough to be > terminated.... They make the situation worse by attracting more insects to the area than would normally come on their own. But (per the article) they kill a large number of insects. Suggestions of moving the light roughly 50 feet from your seating area and only having the light on when you are outside should lessen the problem. > B. Insects that we normally think of as outdoor "pests" (that is, those that > bite) are not attracted by ultraviolet light. The only insects that are fried > are those that are harmless anyway--moths, mayflies, June bugs, and the like. True and False. Some nasty flies get attracted. mosquitos do not. There are some brands that come with "scent packs" to attract other bugs that wouldn't come just to the light. > B (1). Many of the insects obliterated may actually be beneficial insects in > some ways, and could even be species that prey on those very insects we are > trying to eliminate... True. > C. Although the constant sound of zapping may be very gratifying to the owner, > the number of insects terminated represents about 0.0001% of those in the > immediate area. This seems to be borne out by simple statistics. The article indicated that "lots" of insects are zapped. But as in the first statement, the light continues to pull more in, thus the appearance of it not working.
dlp@ih1ap.ATT.COM (Random @ rebmA) (06/06/88)
A recent issue of Mother Earth News ran an article on 'Bat Houses' which can be mounted like bird houses on trees or exterior walls. These houses can hold 30 - 60 bats each of which eats LOTS of night flying bugs. The article claimed that a single house had the bug killing capability of a bug zapper, and would coax bats out of less desireable environments (such as attics). This plan also provides a constant supply of high-grade fertilizer. The little guys DO NOT get tangled in your hair, no matter WHAT grandma may have told you. Random
osmigo@ut-emx.UUCP (06/07/88)
[deleted stuff about bug zappers]
Down here in Austin, front and back porches, if lit, get *inundated* with
June bugs. Jillions of them. Since it's the June bug's larvae that becomes
the notorious, lawn-destroying grubworm (little white maggot-looking bugger),
a bug zapper might help to keep them down a bit. Lately, I haven't been able
to sit on my back porch due to mass kamikaze attacks.
_______________________________________________________________________________
<||>---Ron Morgan---<||>-UUCP: {ihnp4,allegra,ut-sally}!emx!osmigo-<||||||||||>
<||>-Univ. of Texas-<||>-------osmigo@emx.UUCP---------------------<||||||||||>
<||>--Austin Texas--<||>-ARPA: osmigo@emx.utexas.edu---------------<||||||||||>
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------ethan@ut-emx.UUCP (Ethan Tecumseh Vishniac) (06/07/88)
In article <1020@ih1ap.ATT.COM>, dlp@ih1ap.ATT.COM (Random @ rebmA) writes: > A recent issue of Mother Earth News ran an article on 'Bat Houses' > which can be mounted like bird houses on trees or exterior walls. >.... The little > guys DO NOT get tangled in your hair, no matter WHAT grandma > may have told you. > Well, I have had one plow into the back of my neck once while I was bicylcing down a dark street in Aspen CO. It would be hard to say who was more surprised. Of course, he might have been disoriented by all the coke in the air :-). -- I'm not afraid of dying Ethan Vishniac, Dept of Astronomy, Univ. of Texas I just don't want to be {charm,ut-sally,ut-ngp,noao}!utastro!ethan there when it happens. (arpanet) ethan@astro.AS.UTEXAS.EDU - Woody Allen (bitnet) ethan%astro.as.utexas.edu@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU
jvz@cci632.UUCP (John V. Zambito) (06/07/88)
I have a mercury vapor yard lights about 100 feet away from my house, on a 20 foot pole. It attracts a large number of bugs. I mounted a bug zapper to the pole 5 feet from the ground. Many of the bugs around the yard light eventually make it down to the zapper. It gets packed solid with dead bugs and I have to clean it out about once a month with a blow dryer. The yard light is a must, so the bugs are going to be there anyway. The zapper is just a convenient way to do some of those bugs in. I don't seem to get many bugs around the house.
wcb@sortac.UUCP (Bill Barksdale) (06/08/88)
In article <3122@ut-emx.UUCP> osmigo@emx.UUCP (Ron Morgan) writes: >[deleted stuff about bug zappers] > >Down here in Austin, front and back porches, if lit, get *inundated* with >June bugs. Jillions of them. Since it's the June bug's larvae that becomes >the notorious, lawn-destroying grubworm (little white maggot-looking bugger), >a bug zapper might help to keep them down a bit. Lately, I haven't been able >to sit on my back porch due to mass kamikaze attacks. >--- Are you sure those are not Japanese beetles? June bugs don't make kamikaze attacks! Also June bugs tend to hang out in barnyards and pastures . . . Oh yeah, Austin, huh . . . Anyway, I've never heard of June bug larvae being a threat to lawn grasses, but Japanese beetle larvae supposedly tend to destroy your lawn. The two are similar in appearence - I think Japanese beetles are a little smaller. June bugs make fair pets, with a thread tied around one leg - I never tried this with a kamikaze Japanese beetle. -- "Even if the wheels fall off, we can SLIDE in from here!" - Rick Mears, just before winning the '88 Indy 500 Bill Barksdale AT&T Network Systems Atlanta, GA
rsmith@udel.EDU (R Timothy Smith) (06/09/88)
In article <3131@ut-emx.UUCP> osmigo@emx.UUCP (Ron Morgan) writes: >[deleted suggestion about "bat houses" to house bats which eat lots of bugs] > >I'm not sure about this one. Bats are also notorious carriers of rabies. It'd ^^^^^^^^ >just take one rabid bat, then next would be the neigborhood pets, and so on. >No way, Jose... I'll take strong issue with that! Yes, bats can contract rabies; so can people. Neither are "carriers" in the sense of walking around infecting others without being quickly affected themselves. The rabid nature of bats may be "notorious", but it is also undeserved. (They're also "notorious" for flying into people's hair, but that's a crock too). I don't have my research sources here with me to quote from but if you want the details let me know and I'll get back to you. (That was not to imply it's my research, just stuff I've collected in defense of bats from being a spelunker for the past 20 years.) The bottom line is, bats eat a mess of insects, are beneficial, and not anymore likely to give you rabies than your next door neighbor. Build a bat house -- bats need friends!
erl@sfsup.UUCP (E.Lund) (06/09/88)
> I'm not sure about this one. Bats are also notorious carriers of rabies. It'd > just take one rabid bat, then next would be the neigborhood pets, and so on. > No way, Jose... Actually, bats are infrequent carriers of rabies. Until about 20 years ago it was believed that the only species of bat that carried rabies at all was the South American Vampire. It has since been discovered that other species also carry rabies, but very infrequently. A rabid bat, furthermore, is fairly easy to spot, since it does not behave in anything like batlike fashion. It is likely to be aggressive and fly in the daytime among other things. This doesn't mean that there is no danger from bats, but that the danger is probably somewhat less than many people think. Also, if your neighborhood pets have not been vaccinated, which is the only way they would be susceptible, they probably pose more threat to you and your family than the bats. Finally, I could be wrong, but it seems unlikely that you are going to draw bats from great distances to your bat house. It is much more likely that existing neighborhood bats will move into your yard. Since they would have been around anyway (in attics and hollow trees and things), the danger of rabies has not significantly increased. I don't claim that no one ever has problems with rabies from bats, but you probably have a better chance of getting encephalitis or malaria from a mosquito than rabies from a bat. Eric
herb@mit-caf.UUCP (Herbert Neuhaus) (06/10/88)
Sorry, but you have been lied to. Bats don't carry rabies. Of course, any mammal, including bats, can contract rabies. In order for an animal to be a "carrier" it must be relatively immune from the disease, otherwise they die. Bats die from rabies, they don't carry it. The origin of this myth is interesting. It dates back to an old study done on rabies transmission. The researchers found a group of bats which had a disease which could be transmitted to mice. This disease is fatal to mice, and was mis-diagnosed as rabies. The bats were thought to be carriers because they did not get sick from this disease. However, people are not affected by it either. It wasn't rabies. The bottom line is that some bats ARE carriers of a disease fatal to mice.
chris@mimsy.UUCP (Chris Torek) (06/11/88)
In article <3408@sfsup.UUCP> erl@sfsup.UUCP (E.Lund) writes: >Actually, bats are infrequent carriers of rabies. ... A rabid bat, >furthermore, is fairly easy to spot, since it does not behave in >anything like batlike fashion. I think I know what you mean, and that means that you know that bats are *not* `carriers of rabies': % webster carrier car.ri.er \'kar-e--*r\ n ... 5: one that harbors and disseminates the causative agent of disease infectious to its kind to which it is immune The last five words are very important. A disease carrier is immune to the effects of the disease. (Now I am wondering whether Steve Elias will accuse me of semantic mongery again....) -- In-Real-Life: Chris Torek, Univ of MD Comp Sci Dept (+1 301 454 7163) Domain: chris@mimsy.umd.edu Path: uunet!mimsy!chris
cej@ll1a.UUCP (Jones) (06/13/88)
In article <1029@mit-caf.UUCP>, herb@mit-caf.UUCP (Herbert Neuhaus) writes: > Sorry, but you have been lied to. Bats don't carry rabies. Of course, > any mammal, including bats, can contract rabies. In order for an animal > to be a "carrier" it must be relatively immune from the disease, > otherwise they die. Bats die from rabies, they don't carry it. Well, this must vary from one type of bat to the next, or the Chicago Tribune misrepresented some facts in their papaer today. There was an article about the new "wildlife" rabies vaccine that is about to be tested on two small, uninhabited east coast islands. This vaccine is targeted towards raccoons, which it seems are *not* classic carriers - they die from rabies. (Of course an animal that is not a "classic carrier" can still pass on the rabies before it dies, as many do.) However, the article also mentioned a *big* problem with rabies infected vampire bats infecting cattle in Australia, and the article strongly inferred, though did not spell out, that the vampire bats were truly carriers. Can anybody from "down-under" give us the latest "low-down" on the problems you are having? ...ll1a!cej [Just me, not AT&T] Jones HASA Qualified - U.S. Approved
powi@ur-tut (Peter Owings) (06/13/88)
In article <3637@brspyr1.BRS.Com> miket@brspyr1.BRS.Com (Mike Trout) writes: >The question arises: are these bug zappers a big scam? Well, I haven't done any truely scientific study, but as a kid I entertained myself for hours watching bugs spiral into the bug zapper only to burst into flames. There is nothing so entertaining than watching a fly crash and burn. As to there effectiveness, it looked as though it was doing the job. That's as scientific as I get. As for entertainment purposes, buy one for the kid who has everything. Peter... P'otr R'ibalov 'Est n'ech'evo tak dom. Vi zna'et'e, da? >Michael Trout (miket@brspyr1) =-=-=-=-=-=-= UUCP:brspyr1!miket >BRS Information Technologies, 1200 Rt. 7, Latham, N.Y. 12110 (518) 783-1161 > . . . .... .........:.::::.:::::::::.:::::::::::::::::::::::::::o >"By and large, I was only trying to fool Mr. Trout." -Dan Rather
kcs@mfg.zehntel.com (Ken Shupe ) (06/14/88)
I have read with interest all of the inputs about bug zappers and
have not seen any postings by anyone who seems to have used one. You
can theorize all you want and talk about bats all you want, but until
you have used a zapper your just blowing so much smoke and clouding the
subject.
I have one on my front porch and one on my back porch. Both are
a good distance from doors. I leave them plugged in 24 hours a day.
At night they kill mostly mosquitos and some moths. In the day they
kill yellowjackets that are attracted to the dead moths. I believe
they are well worth the investment. It is very rare that I am
bothered by a mosquito inside my house.
rsd@sei.cmu.edu (Richard S D'Ippolito) (06/15/88)
In article <3131@ut-emx.UUCP> Ron Morgan writes: >[deleted suggestion about "bat houses" to house bats which eat lots of bugs] > >I'm not sure about this one. Bats are also notorious carriers of rabies. It'd >just take one rabid bat, then next would be the neigborhood pets, and so on. >No way, Jose... If you're not sure, why post? Cottontails and squirrels are worse, to say nothing of pidgeons (a.k.a. flying rats) as general disease carriers (not rabies). What's the likelihood of pets catching bats which feed in the air (at night yet) as opposed to animals which feed on the ground? I'll take the bats any day. Rich
inc@tc.fluke.COM (Gary Benson) (06/15/88)
Probably. My theory is that a bug zapper attracts beasties not just from my yard, but from the whole neighborhood. I base this on my one exposure to this device -- a party where there were NO bugs until the host turned on his b-z. And then they were everywhere! We had to escape indoors to avoid those who got lost on their from the neighbor's to the zapper (or who just wanted to drop into the cheese dip to cool off before proceeding to the electric char). -- Gary Benson -_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-inc@tc.fluke.com_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_ Publication Services Ensign Benson, Space Cadet, Digital Circus, Sector R John Fluke Mfg. Co. Inc. _-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-
straka@ihlpf.ATT.COM (Straka) (06/17/88)
In article <3175@ut-emx.UUCP> osmigo@emx.UUCP (Ron Morgan) writes: |In article <258@sortac.UUCP| wcb@sortac.UUCP (Bill Barksdale) writes: |[referring to June Bugs] |Well, everybody calls them June Bugs. Little orange things about half an |inch long, sort of fat and round-shaped. By "kamikaze attack," I really |meant that they appear to fly around blindly, bumping into your face just |as you take a sip of coffee. THUMP. SPLASH. ARRGGHHHH, GET A NAPKIN!!! I think I know why they are called June bugs. They are so dumb and defenseless that they are all killed by the time July comes around! No, they don't seem to know how to do enev simple things, like land. Instead, they seem to fly around until they hit something; then drop out of the air onto the ground, usually on their back. -- Rich Straka ihnp4!ihlpf!straka Avoid BrainDamage: MSDOS - just say no!
pen@formtek.UUCP (Phil Nickerson) (06/17/88)
Let us not forget that for every one of the female pest bugs killed,
"Billions and Billions" of offspring over the next million years are
prevented!!!!
While these things do attract more bugs than would normally be in the
area, they greatly reduce the number of bothersome gnats and bugs from
areas that you do not want them if the zapper is properly placed.
--
Philip E. Nickerson,Jr. |UUCP {pitt,psuvax1}!idis!formtek!pen
(412)937-4900|(800)FORMTEK| decvax!formtek!pen
"Programming is simply |Snail Formative Technologies, Inc., Foster Plaza VII
debugging a blank page!" | 661 Andersen Dr., Pittsburgh PA 15220prl@ethz.UUCP (Peter Lamb) (06/25/88)
In article <2413@ll1a.UUCP> cej@ll1a.UUCP (Jones) writes: > However, the article also mentioned a *big* problem with >rabies infected vampire bats infecting cattle in Australia, and ... > Can anybody from "down-under" give us the latest "low-down" >on the problems you are having? As far as I know, Australia is free of rabies. I was on a visit home there just 2 weeks ago, and there was no news I heard about Australia having rabies reported (it would be *big* news). This is one of the reasons for quite stringent import restrictions on animals and animal products, and why your aircraft is sprayed inside with a fairly vile insecticide before you land there. I don't know of `vampire bats' there either. I thought they were South American. I could be wrong on this, I'm an engineer, not a biologist. Could the article have meant Argentina? -- Peter Lamb uucp: seismo!mcvax!ethz!prl eunet: prl@ethz.uucp Tel: +411 256 5241 Institute for Integrated Systems ETH-Zentrum, 8092 Zurich