Poisons Used to Kill Rodents Have Safer Alternatives

Poisons Used to Kill Rodents Have Safer Alternatives

Page 2

In New York rodenticides were found in 49 percent of 12 species of necropsied raptors. For great horned owls the figure was 81 percent.

Similar contamination is seen around the world. In Great Britain necropsies revealed the poisons in 92 percent of red kites, 91 percent of barn owls, and 80 percent of kestrels. In Denmark rodenticides were found in 73 percent of all necropsied raptors. In just a six-week period ended on January 23, 2012, second-generation rodenticides killed about a dozen spotted eagle owls in Port Elizabeth, South Africa. Rodenticides are also blighting raptors in Australia, New Zealand, Ireland, and Canada.

Canada doesn’t have near the rodent problems we do, but raptors there carry as much rodenticide as anywhere—a fact that puzzles Pierre Mineau, a leading ecotoxicologist who retired from Environment Canada’s National Wildlife Research Centre in 2012. “There are high levels of exposure in every species we’ve looked at,” he says. “Not just in the rodent eaters but in the accipiters [which eat mostly birds]. I wouldn’t have expected that. It’s still a mystery how this stuff is moving through terrestrial food chains. Insects may be picking it up and passing it to the songbirds that eat them. That might account for the accipiter [poisoning] connection.”

While the California data is quite recent, monitoring has essentially ceased there and in New York, and it never really began anywhere else. “If you look back at the incidence reports, there are big peaks, and then the funding gets cut off by California and New York,” remarks Nancy Golden, a contaminants specialist with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

But at least in California and New York, nontarget rodenticide poisoning is a public issue. New York City is much enamored of a 22-year-old red-tailed hawk named Pale Male (“How the Nest Was Won”). In February 2012 Pale Male’s mate, Lima, was found dead shortly before she would have laid eggs. The inside of her mouth was pale, as were her heart, lungs, liver, spleen, kidneys, and brain. The necropsy turned up fatal doses of three rodenticides, including brodifacoum, in her liver. Pale Male then took another mate, his sixth—Zena. In 2012 the pair fledged three chicks, one of which is thought to have been killed by rodenticides and two of which were gravely sickened by rodenticides but treated with vitamin K and released. The city, of course, has lost many less famous birds.

New York City Audubon entreats the public never to use the two second-generation rodenticides most toxic to birds (brodifacoum and difethialone) and not to use others except as a last resort and never during nesting season, when adults can feed poisoned rodents to their young and each other. But some bird lovers are scolding the organization for not demanding a complete ban. Director Glenn Phillips offers this defense: “Our city has a huge rat problem. We can’t ban all use of rodenticides; it’s never going to happen. If we were to advocate that, we couldn’t get the support of a single city agency. If you want to tilt at windmills, you can try. If you want to actually make things better for birds, you have to do what you can to reduce rodenticides, even if you can’t eliminate them.”

I have to side with Phillips because his organization has no choice. It’s making the best of a bad situation. But that doesn’t mean second-generation rodenticides have a legitimate place in or around New York City dwellings or in or around dwellings anywhere—not even when set out by farmers or licensed exterminators. Both tend to be just as clueless about collateral poisonings as the general public.

Consider the experience of Jeannine Altmeyer, a retired opera singer from the small south-coast town of Ojai, California. She had a major rat infestation because her 2.5-acre property is surrounded by orange and avocado farms. So in 2009 she hired a licensed exterminator. “These guys came every month for three years,” she told me. “There were far fewer rats for the first two years, but last winter we had a horrible infestation. Every night I’d see at least five rats crawling on the chicken coop. The company put out these tamper-proof boxes. Then on August 3, 2012, my beautiful, five-year old golden retriever, Franz, was acting strange. His gums were snow white; back then I didn’t know what that meant. He weighed 90 pounds. We had to carry him downstairs on a sheet, and he died on the way to the vet’s. Franz was a wonderful dog. I had a necropsy done; they found brodifacoum.”

Altmeyer paused, then continued, her voice cracking. “The pest-control people told me the bait wasn’t dangerous, that there was no secondary poisoning. I used to throw the dead rats over the wall; I would never do that now. The local vets see lots of poisoned dogs because the farmers indiscriminately put the stuff out in their orchards. One woman didn’t have the money to pay for treatment for her poisoned dog so she was going to sell her washer and drier. The vet had to tell her, ‘Keep your machines; I can’t save your dog.’”

 

Magazine Category

Author Profile

Ted Williams

Ted Williams is freelance writer.

Type: Author | From: Audubon Magazine

Comments

EPA moving on this issue

EPA Moves to Ban 12 D-Con Mouse and Rat Control Products
Action Will Prevent Thousands of Accidental Exposures Among Children Each Year
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is moving to ban the sale of 12 D-Con mouse and rat poison products produced by Reckitt Benckiser Inc. because these products fail to comply with current EPA safety standards. Approximately 10,000 children a year are accidentally exposed to mouse and rat baits; EPA has worked cooperatively with companies to ensure that products are both safe to use around children and effective for consumers. Reckitt Benckiser Inc., maker of D-Con brand products, is the only rodenticide producer that has refused to adopt EPA’s safety standards for all of its consumer use products.

“Moving forward to ban these products will prevent completely avoidable risks to children," said James Jones, acting assistant administrator for EPA’s Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention. “With this action, EPA is ensuring that the products on the market are both safe and effective for consumers."

The agency has worked with a number of companies during the last five years to develop safer rodent control products that are effective, affordable, and widely available to meet the needs of consumers. Examples of products meeting EPA safety standards include Bell Laboratories’ Tomcat products, PM Resources’ Assault brand products and Chemsico’s products.

The EPA requires rodenticide products for consumer use to be contained in protective tamper-resistant bait stations and prohibits pellets and other bait forms that cannot be secured in bait stations. In addition, the EPA prohibits the sale to residential consumers of products containing brodifacoum, bromadiolone, difethialone, and difenacoum because of their toxicity to wildlife.

For companies that have complied with the new standards in 2011, EPA has received no reports of children being exposed to bait contained in bait stations. EPA expects to see a substantial reduction in exposures to children when the 12 D-Con products that do not comply with current standards are removed from the consumer market as millions of households use these products each year.

For a complete list of the homeowner use rat and mouse products that meet the EPA’s safety standards, visit: http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/mice-and-rats/rodent-bait-station.html.

For a complete list of Reckitt Benckiser Inc.’s non-compliant products, visit: http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/mice-and-rats/cancellation-process.html#ca....

The EPA’s final Notice of Intent to Cancel will be available in the EPA docket EPA-HQ-OPP-2013-0049 at www.regulations.gov. After Federal Register publication of the Notice of Intent to Cancel, Reckitt Benckiser will have 30 days to request a hearing before an EPA Administrative Law Judge. If a hearing is not requested, the cancellations become final and effective.

Information on Rodenticide products and EPA’s review is available at: http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/reregistration/rodenticides/.

More information on preventing and controlling rodents is available at: http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/controlling/rodents.htm.

Anticoagulants in wildlife

A property that makes second generation anticoagulants so dangerous to non-targets is their resistance to metabolic degradation. Levels build up in the liver (where clotting factors are produced). Multiple sublethal exposures can put predators in the danger zone over time. I supect many incidents of raptor mortality are the result of multiple exposures over time. With an array of 2nd generation products now in use, it is now common to detect 2 or 3 different anticoagulants per raptor.

Thanks for sharing this

Thanks for sharing this useful information

---------------------------------------------------------

Press Release Distribution has never been easier with Alcardinalship.com. Increase traffic and visibility to your site by submitting your press release to our site.

Press Release Distribution has never been easier with Austinteeclub.com. Increase traffic and visibility to your site by submitting your press release to our site.

Press Release Distribution has never been easier with Lcmnyc.org. Increase traffic and visibility to your site by submitting your press release to our site.

Press Release Distribution has never been easier with Live PR News. Increase traffic and visibility to your site by submitting your press release to our site.

Press Release Distribution has never been easier with Press HD. Increase traffic and visibility to your site by submitting your press release to our site.

Thanks Joe

Good point, Joe. I found your necropsy reports very helpful.

To quote the Lorax: Unless

To quote the Lorax:

Unless someone like you cares a whole, awful lot, nothing is going to get better. It's not.

We are connected to the environment, like it or not

We are connected to the environment, like it or not, so we can't really elect to sacrifice some species to benefit ourselves. Poisoning one species and having it end up poisoning more, not only makes a mess of the environment but these poisons can end up in us, too. Humans are part of this ecosystem and doing destructive things to it, only harms us, too.

Spreading Poisons

Well said, Cindy.

The person writing this

The person writing this article seems to know a lot about different species of birds. As far as treating and eliminating rats however not so much.

Snap traps- very good for mice. They are curious to anything new to their environment. Roof rats and Norway rats however are not. Leading to a very ineffective treatment method.

Glue boards- probably the most in humane of them all. I On numerous occasions have seen glue boards with nothing but a rodent leg attached. The rat will literally gnaw its own leg off to free itself.

Electrocuting rodent stations- work but the chances of being able to eliminate a family nesting in an attic very slim.

Soup cans attached to a rod?- I have yet to try but damn I want to lol.

1st generation rodenticides- very ineffective over time hence the reasoning for having such products that work such as 2nd generation rodenticides. Using 1st gen takes far longer to eliminate problems often leading to the rodents destroying expensive wiring which can cause fire. Rodents are said to be the primary cause of about 20% of fires. So as for me as much as I hate what the effects to wildlife are. I will trade birds for human life.

I had friend who stayed in a

I had friend who stayed in a nice hotel in Moscow once. There was a mouse in the room so they called the front desk. Within a couple of minutes a man knocked on their door. When they opened it he handed them a cat. When they came back to the hotel at the end of the day, the mouse and the cat were gone.

Egypt had it right. Europe in the middle ages (and the USA now) got it wrong. Sometimes the tried and true way just might still be the best way. But Ted and the Audubon Society have lost all objectivity and are therefore dangerous. IMHO

Chad, will you trade pets for human life too?

What is the threat to human life from rodents? The threat is very mild in most places! I myself had a horrible problem when rat mites infested my house - probably because of a dead rat in the attic. As soon as a rat dies in your home, its parasites jump ship and go looking for new warm bodies - including yours and your pets. The mites were horrible, and took me months to get rid of, but I didn't get sick or die. Poisoning rodents in your house means they can end up in the walls, which can create a major problem for a homeowner. Poisoned rats don't just get eaten by wildlife, there are thousands, perhaps millions of documented cases of pet dogs and cats being poisoned - are you ok with that? I don't feel that pest control operators or companies are a good source to listen to on this issue. I myself, in my volunteer work with wildlife, have heard many times that a pest control operator out and out lied to a consumer by telling them the poisons they use are "safe." That is simply an oxymoron. There is no such thing as a safe rat poison. The only product that came close was called Rodetrol, it uses non-poison, to kill rats by affecting their metabolism. This product was from the UK and they could never get EPA approval in the US. Wonder why? I suspect major corporate bad guys like Reckett-Beckieser - maker of d-Con, who use their corporate power to influence agencies and politicians so they can keep making billions from the poisoning of childen, pets and wildlife. Our small grassroots effort of education people is making progress and RB can't stand it! They are the only company refusing to follow the EPA's recommendations. You can do a lot to eliminate the possibly of rodents starting fires but investing in an exclusion process of a building. Costs more up front, and deprives PCOs of their lucrative monthly fees, yet more and more offer it because their customers are wising up and demanding it as an alternative to poison. We are a small group, but we are not going away.

Add comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
1 + 3 =
Solve this simple math problem and enter the result. E.g. for 1+3, enter 4.
By submitting this form, you accept the Mollom privacy policy.