Vacuum devices were compared for sampling the abundance of psyllids. One vacuum device was an AC rechargeable, handheld, cordless model, while a second was a handheld, DC model powered through a cord connected to a 12-volt vehicle battery. Each of the devices had a mesh cylinder (substituted for a dust bag) in which the insects were captured. The third device was a reversed leaf blower with a two-cycle gasoline engine, with the insects captured in a standard-sized aerial insect net. Each device had advantages and disadvantages over the others depending on the collecting situation. However, the gas-powered device captured the most psyllids. The handheld models provided ease in handling compared to the bulkier (and noisier) leaf blower. The DC-powered sampler was tethered to its power source, in this case, a vehicle that could access trees in a commercial grove, whereas, the AC cordless device may be more suitable for dooryard situations. The disadvantage of the cordless device was that its operating time of approximately 10 minutes was sufficient for sampling psyllids on only two trees before it had to be recharged for 16 hours. Because of greater air flow, the gas device captured greater numbers than did either of the smaller electrical devices. The sampling procedure consisted of vacuuming a target tree for 5 minutes. The mean numbers of psyllids captured per tree with the AC, DC, and leaf blower devices were respectively: 17.4 (n = 44), 33.0 (n = 72), and 96.8 (n = 47). All mean differences were statistically significant. To test the efficiency of the leaf blower, some trees were immediately re-sampled. The proportion of psyllids in the first sample compared to the resample was approximately 3:1.