The Bird-X™ Range ofprofessional stainless steel bird control spikes offers theuser up to 45 more points perlinear metre* than otherleading brands.

• Super flexible• Super slim • UV stabilized polycarbonate base• Built-in glue groove & rivet holes• Can be installed on uneven surfaces with ease• Available in Narrow, Medium & Wide x 115mm for Pigeons and 150mm for Gulls

• Simple-to-use, patented clear bed bugmonitor housing

• Quick and easy to check byhousekeeping or pest controllers

• Active lure ingredient attracts bed bugsand 2 instar nymphs into the monitor

• Discreet, maintenance-free active bedbug monitoring

Bed Bug Treatments Effective?

Call: +44 (0)1903 715 631 for a Trade Price List and Cataloguesales@bird-x.co.ukFree written quotations. Free Technical Advice. Distributors wanted.* Based on medium width spike. Bird-X Limited, Units 2c & 2d, Littlehampton Marina, Ferry Road, Littlehampton, West Sussex, BN17 5DS. United Kingdom.

Call +44 (0)1903 715 631For a Trade Price List and Cataloguesales@bird-x.co.ukFree written quotations. Free Technical Advice. Distributors wantedBird-X Limited, Units 2c & 2d, Littlehampton Marina, Ferry Road, Littlehampton, West Sussex, BN17 5DS. United Kingdom.

There are now 45 reasons why you should change your spikes supplier

Don’t guess...Kiss Goodbye to Cardboard!!

Give your customers peace of mind...Give them Bed Bug ALERT™

©O

DA

When it comes to permanent baiting,change is definitely in the air. Speaking atthe Pest-Ventures seminar in April, Acheta'sAdrian Meyer said: “It is likely that there willbe increased label restrictions on the use ofpermanent baits and that these may bebased upon a combination of some absolutelabel requirements as well as upon acceptedgood practice.”

He explained how the key driver isenvironmental protection and much of thecurrent pressure for change is coming notonly from an appreciation in the UK thatchange is necessary, but also from Europe.Evidence that significant numbers of

predatory and scavenging birds andmammals contain low level contaminationby anticoagulant rodenticides is mounting.Further evidence also suggests that much ofthis contamination may be a result of smallmammals, particularly wood mouse( ), accessingrodenticide baits and subsequently beingcaught or scavenged, resulting in secondarypoisoning. The use of permanent baits in awide range of situations, is an obviouscontamination route.

When the anticoagulant rodenticides wereincluded on Annex I of the EU BiocidalProducts Directive, as was necessary toallow their continued use in the EU,concerns were raised about their potential topoison wildlife. This led to the identificationof an environmental risk mitigation measureto restrict permanent baiting in order toreduce the potential for non-target animalsand birds to consume bait.

It was subsequently agreed at EU level that anumber of phrases be included onanticoagulant rodenticide labels including

Whilst this phrase appears to allow pestprofessionals to continue to use thetechnique, there is a sting in the tail –individual EU Member States have theflexibility to include their own national riskmitigation measures. Here in the UK, thecurrent regulatory position is that rodenticideproducts authorised under the BiocidalProducts Regulations (BPR) – that's productswith an authorisation number that followsthe format UK-20**-**** – are also requiredto carry the phrase

– the implication

being that once control is achieved no

further baiting should take place. Indeed

some UK rodenticide labels have already

gone further stating:

Apodemus sylvaticus

'Unless under the supervision of a pestcontrol operator or other competentperson, do not use anticoagulantrodenticides as permanent bait'.

'In most circumstances

anticoagulant bait should have achieved

control within 35 days'

‘Long term use of this product

(particularly out of doors) must be

avoided. Anticoagulant baits should not

be left in place for longer than is

necessary; typically this should

Environmental risk

Permanent baiting– Is the end nigh?

Do you use permanent baiting, where rodenticide bait is kept in place all

year round to protect customer's premises from re-invasion? You are not

alone. Recent survey results indicate that six out of ten pest professionals use

this approach at some stage. According to rodent control expert Adrian

Meyer, that's not surprising as it has become an established technique and

one which is often specified in pest control contracts. But is that all about to

change and should it? Associate editor Helen Riby reports.

“Rodenticide label restrictions are liableto increase,” says Adrian Meyer

We have all seen lines of bait boxessited in places which contribute nothingtowards effective rodent control

Extent of secondary poisoningby anticoagulant rodenticides

Species % Carrying anticoagulantresidues

Red Kite 70

Kestrel 67

Weasel 30

Stoat 23

COMMERCIALRodent baiting

May & June 2012 www.pestmagazine.co.uk 29pest

©O

DA

Respondents' comments on this topic sum the situation up well.They clearly show that many pest professionals are adopting arisk-based approach but that they are also coming acrossresistance from customers. Representative comments were:

“Always try to dissuade customers from permanentrodenticide baiting preferring to use non-toxic as analternative but sometimes not possible. Customer thinksthey are not getting 'value.”

“The customers expect the baits used to be able to controlany infestation before it becomes a problem to them, notwait until the infestation has taken hold.”

“We will have permanent internal baiting due tocustomer specification but at a low level. External baitstations will only be baited if there is an activeinfestation.”

“I am currently reviewing my contracts which havepreviously been baited permanently and looking at waysto minimise the risk of any non-target poisoning.”

“Only one location where we do this. This is in a parkwhere there is a constant problem with rats. Mainly dueto ponds within the park and the public feeding ducks.”

�

�

�

�

�

How widespread ispermanent baiting?

According to the latest findings in the BASF/ National UKPest Management Survey 2012, on average around six out often pest controllers will use permanent baiting at some stage.

Pest

Dr

Rein

er

Pospis

chil

©

take no longer than 35 days, although in some situationslonger periods may be necessary. Records of treatments andrisk assessments should be maintained and only where a riskassessment for a current infestation demonstrates that controlwill require a long term baiting programme will the relevantregulatory authority permit this approach. Where the need forlong term baiting has been shown, the user should monitor thesituation closely to show that the circumstances originallyconsidered do not significantly change.'

'time

scales for revisiting bait' 'restrictions on permanent baiting'

in situ

Mus domesticus Rattus

norvegicus

Aware of the issue, the Health & Safety Executive (HSE) plans tocarry out a consultation exercise on its proposals for UKenvironmental risk mitigation measures for second generationanticoagulants. They are proposing to revisit the issues of

andas they relate to product authorisation and labelling.

For the moment there are still plenty of product labels out therewhich have been approved under the old Control of PesticidesRegulations (COPR) which make no specific reference to permanentbaiting. However the majority of existing labels do includestatements about the frequency of revisits.

As Adrian Meyer pointed out: “In most cases, labels require visits tobe made, frequently, or, more specifically, at approximately seven toten day intervals. At its longest, 14 days seems to have beenaccepted as the maximum time between visits. This brings thepractice of permanent baiting into conflict with the label becausethe frequency of visits under a permanent baiting programme isalmost always much longer than that specified on the label.”

NPTA chairman Iain Turner goes further. He has describedpermanent baiting as the industry's dirty secret. Speaking at theYorkshire & Humberside Pest Liaison Group meeting on 16 May hesuggested that permanent baiting has most probably been illegalsince the introduction of the Control of Pesticides Regulations back in1986. These regulations says that users should only use pesticides(including rodenticides) when justified.

“How can that mean leaving toxic bait when there are nopests to control, just in case a few rats show up?” he asked.

The objective of permanent baiting, indoors against house mouse( ) and outdoors against Norway rats (

), is to protect the customer from re-infestation, but thereis no good scientific evidence to support this. Despite this lack of

Consultation planned

Why is it so popular?

Localauthorities

Self-employedPrivatecompanies

pestThe independent UK pest management magazineThe National Uk Pest Management Survey 2012

Permanent baiting

Do you use permanent baiting, where bait boxes

containing rodenticide are left in place all year round?

All replies

57%

73%

46%52%

43%

27%

54%48%

Yes No

Clear evidence of bait take by Apodemus sylvaticus

TECHNICALRodent baiting

www.pestmagazine.co.uk May & June 201230 pest

©O

DA

evidence, the practice has become the normin most contracts and many third partyaudited standards require, or at leastencourage, the use of permanent baits,including perimeter baits.

Adrian Meyer commented: “We have allseen lines of bait boxes sited in ridiculousplaces which contribute nothing towardseffective rodent control. The toxic baits withinthem are rarely 'taken' by commensalrodents and far more frequently by specieslike the wood mouse.”

However, 'filling bait boxes' has become agood source of income for many pest controlcompanies. Indeed where earnings arelinked to the number of boxes on site, orwhere the customer has to 'buy' the boxes,there is a clear financial incentive to over-bait. There is also little doubt that whencustomers see plenty of bait boxes, all full oftoxic bait, they feel that their pest controlleris looking after their interests.

The evidence though tells a different story. Inaudits, only around 2% to 3% of permanentbaits show any signs of rat activity whereas1 in 5 (that's 20%) may show wood mouseactivity, depending on where the baits aresited. Even without pressure from the EU isn'tit time the industry moved away from thisineffective practice?

The obvious answer is to use non-toxic ormonitoring baits or is it?

Adrian says it's not always clear-cut: “Theproblem is that by providing 'non-tox food'you are encouraging other species like

to visit the boxes,pulling them closer to customers' premiseswhere they have the potential to become apest in their own right. In addition you mayalso be encouraging them to take toxic baitif that has to be reintroduced.”

As a practical pest controller as well aschairman of NPTA, Iain Turner sees a cleardistinction between indoor and outdoorpermanent baiting. “There is a need todistinguish between these two,” he says.“There is no big additional environmentalrisk from indoor permanent baiting and it isa really useful tool to protect customers'premises from mice.”

Of course many food premises will not allowtoxic baits in production and food areas forfear of contaminating product so it's not atool suited to every indoor situation.

Iain agrees with Adrian that outdoorpermanent baiting is a different matter. “Useyour common sense. That's what thecustomer should be buying, your expertise.

I can see no reason to keep toxic bait inperimeter stations other than in veryexceptional circumstances such as a hugelyinfested site next door. In such a case youcould argue that it's not permanent baiting,it's part of an ongoing rodent controltreatment. Risk assessment is the key andthat risk assessment needs to be writtendown,” he advises.

“If customers don't like the idea of youvisiting empty boxes then use a non toxicalternative. I use my own – bird seed with ared food dye. It looks the part and stopscompetitors telling your customers that theyare paying for nothing!”

There are also other options on the marketsuch as traps and electronic monitoringdevices and, in the right circumstances, thereis also a place for first generation productssuch as coumatetryl along the building line,where secondary poisoning is not so muchof an issue.

Clearly there is an education job to doamongst both customers and auditors. Someguidance from HSE would help andhopefully will be forthcoming following theconsultation. In the meantime the industryneeds to influence the auditors who havebeen one of the main drivers behindpermanent baiting.

Speaking from the audience at Pest-Ventures, BPCA's Kevin Higgins explainedthat the Association has already been intouch with the British Retail Consortium, whohad been very receptive. A trainingprogramme for their auditors has already

been set up. As for AIB they say that theirstandard does not require the use of toxicbaits outside. However anecdotal evidencesuggests that AIB auditors are interpretingpermanent baiting as requiring toxic bait.Kevin also added that the Campaign forResponsible Rodenticide Use was alreadyspeaking to the Farm Assurance Schemes.

Customer education however is down to pestcontrollers as well as trade associations. Theindustry should be welcoming thesedevelopments which recognise thatprofessional pest control is not about fillingbait stations, it's about selling a pest-freeenvironment.

Apodemus sylvaticus

What other options are available?

Where next?

NPTA’s Iain Turner describes permanentbaiting as the industry’s dirty secret

The Norway rat (Rattus norvegicus) pictured is the target but the wood mouse(Apodemus sylvaticus) is all too often the rodent that takes the bait

COMMERCIALRodent baiting

May & June 2012 www.pestmagazine.co.uk 31pest