But this is just your theory isnt it?
No hard evidence to prove this theory?
I would argue that you are in fact wrong, just by counting the number of dead wasps in a nest after treatment isnt sufficient to prove your theory.
Having treated "thousands" of wasp nests, i would argue that a large proportion of wasps actually leave the nest soon after treatment is applied. Returning wasps enter, some come back out, in fact its chaos.
I suggest you attend a few treatments and watch carefully what happens.
Have you ever counted the number of dead wasps on the ground around a treated nest area?
Just because a theory suits your cause, doesnt make it fact.
I know that pest controllers perceive me as a threat because I challenge the orthodox view on nest eradication. I can only tell you that I have been successful in reducing sting rates in themes parks and zoos by over 99% compared to 'orthodox' wasp control, i.e. predominantly nest eradication and use of wasp pots.
Those theme parks and zoos with a proactive nest treatment programme all exhibited extended nuisance wasp seasons starting well before nests were maturing elsewhere. When the same theme parks and zoos swopped to judicious nest treatment, i.e. treating all nests before 7.00 am on a risk assessed basis and swopped wasp pots out for high efficiency traps (use as part of IWM), then a) the nuisance wasp season reverted to type in common with other areas and b) the number of sting cases reported fell by over 99%. This is over several seasons and a number of different sites. You are entitled to perceive that as theory. Those theme parks and zoos however will not revert to historical wasp control methods as they have introduced corporate wide policies (including formal strategies, integrated management teams and continuity measures including repeat annual training) precisely because they don't perceive it as theory but because they've had first hand experience to the contrary.
You are correct that wasps do leave nests that are treated to drop dead all over the place. But these are resident wasps (sentries and queen and brood attendants) of which there are about 200 - 300 per nest. It may also be the case that nests treated just prior to maturation with newly emerged queens and drones may have a further 1,500 to 3,000 sexual progeny. Again, these will leave the nest if the nest is treated to drop dead all over the place. However, these are not foragers of which there will be between 2,000 to 5,000 in an average nest rising to 20,000 in a large nest. These will by and large remain outside the nest never to re-enter (save for one caveat).
I have attended plenty of wasp nest treatments and performed quite a bit of hands on research as well. Foraging wasps will not re-enter the nest if they don't get landing rights from their sentries. If however, the sentry point is remote from the nest (e.g. eaves on a roof) and the sentries aren't incapacitated when the nest is treated then foragers will return into the body of the remote treated nest (e.g. one in the body of an attic away from the entry point at the eaves) and be killed.
My cause is protecting people from wasp stings and I make no apology in honouring my sworn professional oath to put patients first. I'm not a threat to pest controllers as IWM is in fact revenue positive compared to (injudicious) nest eradication. Furthermore, I have no wish to disenfranchise pest controllers. Why would I? They are an essential component to my cause. If I am a threat to any one then it's agrochem companies that sell tanker loads of pesticides because preserving wasps will reduce the need for general use pesticides and because judicious nest eradication will limit the use of pesticides to those nests that are a direct health threat. Neither of which is a problem to pesties who adopt IWM.
