Xref: utzoo sci.bio:1215 sci.misc:1627 misc.consumers.house:2398 rec.gardens:886 Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!bellcore!faline!thumper!ulysses!andante!mit-eddie!uw-beaver!cornell!batcomputer!itsgw!brspyr1!miket From: miket@brspyr1.UUCP Newsgroups: sci.bio,sci.misc,misc.consumers.house,rec.gardens Subject: Bug zappers Keywords: A royal scam? Message-ID: <3637@brspyr1.BRS.Com> Date: 2 Jun 88 21:24:15 GMT Organization: BRS Info Technologies, Latham NY Lines: 57 Posted: Thu Jun 2 17:24:15 1988 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 Rather