Rodenticide Bans Should Be More Complete

It's great that more and more municipalities are joining the effort to create policies that prohibit the use of second-generation anticoagulant rodenticides (SGARs) on public property. Doubtless these localities would like to include private property, but for the state's pre-emption of pesticide regulation, which limits cities and towns to writing earnest policies, instead of binding laws,that can extend only to lands and buildings owned by the local government.

Unfortunately, many of the policies seem to mirror the current state rodenticide bill, S644, which would allow for use of SGARs for limited time periods during a public health emergency that's presumably precipitated by rodent infestation. If the purpose of the ban on SGARs is to prevent the deaths of non-target wildlife, then I fail to see the logic in even their limited use, especially when alternative poisons, such as cholecalciferol, corn gluten, and CO2 are available and do not harm other wildlife who may eat an affected rodent. The preference for SGARs has been their ability to kill, in a day or two, a rodent who consumes just a single dose, while the alternatives can take up to a week. These are the methods that will most likely be utilized as replacements for the "everyday" use of SGARs. So, if effective over the longterm, no public health emergencies should arise.

Then what's the concern? We've come to rely on the supposed swiftness of anticoagulants, though somehow rodents continue to proliferate. Not every policy emphasizes the need for integrated pest management, that is, shifting the focus to better trash supervision, containment of food attractants, and tighter building structures. None of the policies define "public health emergency." Some of the local policies rely on the judgment of a single official for the determination of the need to revert to SGARs. Some of the policies allow temporary use of SGARs, but without a time limit. A little bit of SGAR goes a long way at killing hawks, owls, eagles, foxes, coyotes, and other rodent predators - - all of whom are the best method of rodent control.

Human disruption of our ecosystems leads to the imbalance of nature, the paradigm where certain wildlife species are the enemy, and the presumption of a need to mercilessly kill what bothers us. As an animal advocate, it pains me to suggest any rodenticide that causes rats and mice to suffer, but I offer them here to satisfy the adherents to the paradigm, until it can be changed. And, so other wildlife might be preserved.

Ideally, the recommendation should be the least inhumane, and obviously longer-lasting, approach to control of rodent populations: shock boxes baited with Contrapest, a contraceptive for rats and mice that has been shown to reduce their numbers by up to 95% in a year's time. Definitely not a means favored by the licensed pesticide applicator (aka, exterminator) lobby, so don't expect its members to offer or promote Contrapest. Tellingly, licensed applicators are the only entities allowed, by federal law, to dispense SGARs!

Apropos of federal law, the U.S. Congress is considering a bill to put a national ban on the sale of glue boards, which are an extremely inhumane manner of killing. Please don't wait for the legislation to take effect.