This fall, the EPA is expected to announce proposed rule changes for rodenticide use. This will be the industry’s first peek at what potentially may impact day-to-day rodent control operations in a big way.
In September, the Environmental Protection Agency is expected to propose new risk mitigation measures for rodenticides that will change how pest management professionals use these products across the country.
While the EPA’s proposed interim decision (PID) has not yet been made public, experts are confident the recommended changes will focus on ways to reduce rodenticide exposure to non-target animals and potential effects on endangered species.
THREE POTENTIAL CHANGES. The first proposed change likely will classify bulk rodenticide as a restricted use pesticide. Under federal law, this change would require anyone applying rodenticide to be a certified applicator or be working under the supervision of a certified applicator, so long as he or she is trained, knows how to contact a supervisor and the supervisor is accessible.
Many states, however, have stricter requirements for applying restricted use pesticides, especially when the work is done by noncertified applicators. Some states require supervising certified applicators to be available by telephone, while others call for them to be on site during application or within visual contact of the applicator. This means they can’t walk out of sight, such as to the other side of the building, during application.
“In those places, that’s problematic for use, because that restricted-use status really creates an impediment to being able to use these products,” said Jim Fredericks, vice president of technical and regulatory affairs at the National Pest Management Association (NPMA).
Only a few niche products used by the industry currently are classified as restricted-use pesticides. These include fumigants, chemical frightening agents for bird control and rodent tracking powders. Most pest control companies don’t use these products very often. When they do, they can arrange for a certified staff member to apply the product or be on-site or accessible.
But should an everyday product such as rodenticides join this club, daily rodent control operations will become much more onerous for companies, industry experts told PCT.
In addition to classifying rodenticides as restricted-use products, EPA was expected to propose two other changes: additional requirements for personal protective equipment (PPE) when handling rodenticides and the removal of rodent carcasses.
Carcass removal likely would require applicators to return to an application site to search for and remove the bodies of any rodents that ate and died from rodenticide. The intention is to prevent animal scavengers or birds of prey from eating the rodent carcasses and accidentally ingesting residual rodenticide.
Fredericks is unsure of the proposed frequency, duration or search radius that applicators would need to look for dead rodents. “We have lots of questions,” he said.
The impact on pest control companies and customers could be significant. “If you’re returning every day, the cost of rodent control is going to skyrocket. And I don’t know exactly if the pest control industry has the workforce [to do it],” Fredericks said. “We’re already under workforce constraints. Imagine having to hire the people to go back and look [for dead rodents] after the fact.”
Under current practices, an applicator might return to an account anywhere from once a week to once a month to check rodent bait stations.
The proposed changes raise other issues as well, said Katie Swift, senior manager of governmental affairs at Liphatech and chair of the Anticoagulant Rodenticide Task Force (ARTF), which represents rodenticide manufacturers.
“In some areas, such as rural and low-income areas, professional pest control services with certified applicators may not be available, or the costs will become unaffordable,” she wrote in an email.
NPMA, ARTF and other groups are working to educate EPA officials on the importance of rodenticides, the economic impact of the proposed changes and how restricted-use status could affect the industry’s ability to protect food, structures and public health.
ACTIVIST MOMENTUM. Anti-rodenticide activism has increased in North America in recent years. In January 2021, California enforced new laws that restrict the use of second-generation anti-coagulant rodenticides (SGARs). Massachusetts and Connecticut also are pursuing restrictions on these products.
In Canada, the province of British Columbia banned the use of SGARs for 18 months in July 2021 while it studied the issue. In May, it proposed rule changes that include prohibiting access and use of SGARs to the public and most commercial and industrial operations, prohibiting preventative baiting programs and restricting the number of continuous days rodenticide can be used, among other measures. Final rodenticide rules were expected to be announced in late 2022 and become effective in early 2023.
In January, the city of Montréal in the Canadian province of Québec began enforcing a new bylaw that bans rodenticide sales to consumers and restricts outdoor use. Michel Maheu, general manager of Maheu&Maheu in Québec City, said his company interprets the bylaw to mean rodenticides can be used outdoors by professionals to exterminate rodents that are present, but cannot be used long term for preventive maintenance around building perimeters.
Anti-rodenticide groups petitioned the Biden Administration to impose a national moratorium on SGARs in 2021, citing a University of Georgia study that found rodenticide residue was present in the majority of eagles that were tested. Anti-rodenticide billboards and grassroots advocacy efforts have increased in the Pacific Northwest, Florida and the East Coast.
Fredericks said it is not yet clear how rodenticide residues end up in predatory animals. Researchers at the University of California are studying this nexus. “Until we get to the bottom of that, it’s really hard to mitigate the risk,” and regulators are making “stabs in the dark” that create hurdles for PMPs trying to protect food, property and health, he said.
NEXT STEPS. The proposed EPA changes to rodenticide labels are a result of the agency’s scheduled review of rodenticide products. EPA re-evaluates registered pesticides at least every 15 years to ensure they can carry out their intended function without adversely effecting human health and the environment.
The PID initially was expected to be published in April, but that date was delayed after EPA officials requested additional information from rodent experts and industry stakeholders. The data provided may result in the PID containing more industry friendly language.
“We think it was very important information that they were not aware of. It is good news that they are taking the time to carefully go through all of it,” said Swift.
Once the PID is published, the public has 60 days to comment on it. EPA will consider those comments before making its final decision, which Fredericks doesn’t expect to happen before late 2022. Then registrants will have 90 days to submit proposed label changes, EPA and registrants will discuss label changes and new labels will be printed and affixed to rodenticide buckets.
“We wouldn’t see any label changes this year. I don’t know if we would see it next year. But we will see changes, that’s for sure,” said Fredericks.
Industry groups will continue to promote the value of rodenticides for rodent control. “What we advocate for is smart changes that make sense. We want to make sure people are safe, that the environment is safe — but that we can still provide these services that are essential,” said Fredericks.
He also encouraged PMPs to take an integrated pest management (IPM) approach to rodent control. This includes documenting and monitoring for rodent activity before using rodenticide in bait stations.
“If there’s a place to compromise, it’s probably stewardship and focusing on IPM to reduce the amount of bait that’s actually being used,” said Fredericks.
The author is a frequent contributor to PCT.