If you see wood damage by new house borer, is it necessary to treat it to prevent reinvestment?

When assessing wood damage caused by a new house borer, it is not necessary to treat it to prevent reinfestation unless certain conditions are met. New house borers typically infest and damage wood that is already compromised, often in older structures where the wood is unsuitable for ongoing pest issues.

The rationale for not requiring treatment stems from the understanding that the life cycle of the new house borer concludes when the damaged wood is no longer viable due to drying out or being exposed to the elements, thus preventing further infestations. If the wood has been exposed and is not in a conducive state for supporting the borers, treatment might not be effective or needed.

In this context, the other options suggest treatment might be necessary under certain conditions — such as extensive damage or structural concerns — which could be considered if the infestation poses immediate risks. However, treating for new infestations specifically when the existing damage is observed may not be warranted, particularly if the wood is not likely to support new borers. Understanding the natural behavior of house borers, combined with the conditions of the damaged wood, leads to the conclusion that treatment is not required in all scenarios.