DOCSLIB.ORG

Rodenticides Labeled for Use to Control Meadow Voles and Pocket Gophers Updated June 13, 2016 MEADOW VOLE PRODUCTS

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Rodenticides Labeled for Use to Control Meadow Voles and Pocket Gophers Updated June 13, 2016 MEADOW VOLE PRODUCTS Rodenticides Labeled for Use to Control Meadow Voles and Pocket Gophers Updated June 13, 2016 ALWAYS read and follow the instructions printed on the pesticide label. The pesticides listed in these tables are currently registered with Idaho State Department of Agriculture. Pesticide labels change frequently and may have changed since this was written, therefore, check the current label to be sure it is registered for use. Products that are labeled as “Restricted Use” require an Idaho Pesticide Applicators License to purchase and apply. “General Use” products can be purchased and used by the general public 18 years and older. “General Use” products can be found in a variety of retail businesses, such as home improvement stores, farm stores, retail greenhouse businesses, and grocery stores. ATTENTION: If the product label lists any “commensal rodents” (Norway rat, roof rat, or house mouse), labels will have specific directions for use and location of bait stations, and product quantity allowed. Some, not all, of the products listed on these tables have commensal rodents listed on the labels. Be sure to thoroughly read and follow all label directions. MEADOW VOLE PRODUCTS GENERAL USE PESTICIDES—MEADOW VOLES THESE PRODUCTS ARE FOR HOMEOWNER/CONSUMER USE. Rodenticide Common Trade Restricted Rodenticide Consumer Labeled Uses/Comments Active Ingredient Names Use Pesticide Type Use Scoot Squirrel, Miller Hot Sauce Animal Biopesticide Spray on ornamentals, hay bales, vegetable crops. Do not use Capsaicin NO YES Repellent, Repellex spray, tablets indoors. Place tablet type formulations in water and apply to soil. Systemic tablets Mole Go Granules, Natural Use as a repellent around structures and plants. Some products Sweeney’s Mole and product; should be watered after the application. These products are Castor oil Gopher Repellent, NO YES exempt from exempted from federal pesticide laws, but are considered a pesticide Tomcat Mole and federal review in Idaho. Gopher Repellent Ramik Mini Bars, Ramik Green Bait Anticoagulant. This product may only be used inside and within 100 feet of Diphacinone Packs, Ramik Green, NO Only for YES buildings. Some products come in prepared bait stations. Cannot be Ramik Mouser, indoor use. applied directly to food or feed crops. Rodentex Bait Station Dried porcine Plants KYDD and bovine NO Repellent YES Apply as a liquid to plants and let dry. Repellent blood Anticoagulant. Kaput Rat & Mouse Non-food/non-feed areas. No burrow and no broadcast uses allowed. Warfarin NO To be used in YES Bait, Mouse Blocks Use a bait station within 100 feet of a building. bait stations. Acute poison. General use products can only be used as a below ground treatment. Only use NO above ground usage; NO broadcast applications; NO bait station Zinc Phosphide Prozap, ZP Oat Bait YES/NO underground YES/NO use. For more specific information, contact your local University of directly in vole Idaho Extension Educator. burrow holes RESTRICTED USE PESTICIDES—MEADOW VOLES THESE PRODUCTS ARE FOR PROFESSIONAL APPLICATORS AND FARMERS/RANCHERS WITH A PESTICIDE LICENSE. THEY ARE NOT FOR HOMEOWNER/CONSUMER USE, PLEASE REFER TO THE TABLE ABOVE FOR CONSUMER PRODUCTS. Rodenticide Common Trade Restricted Rodenticide Consumer Labeled Uses/Comments Active Ingredient Names Use Pesticide Type Use Aluminum Prohibited for use within 100 feet of any building utilized by humans Phosphide Weevil-Cide YES Fumigant NO or domestic animals. Fumigant Use in parks, lawns, golf courses, orchards, nurseries, non-cropland. Anticoagulant Aerial label for orchards, nurseries, within 100 feet of cropland edges. Chlorophacinone Rozol, Borderline YES NO bait Some products may require bait stations for outdoor, above-ground bait placements. Difethialone Fastdraw, Firststrike, NO Anticoagulant NO Must be used indoors or within 100 feet of buildings. This is a Generation, Hombre, bait. general use product, but only sold in large quantities for professional Renegade (various applicator use. products with these names) Use in non-food/non-feed areas, nurseries, tree farms, orchards. Anticoagulant Some products may require bait stations for outdoor, above-ground Diphacinone Ramik Brown YES NO bait bait placements. Use in parks, lawns, ornamentals, rangeland, orchards, golf courses, around agricultural buildings, and in some crops. Moisture will cause Non- the product to volatilize or “gas off”. Do not apply before rain or an Prozap, ZP Rodent Anticoagulant irrigation event. These commercial products can be used in a bait Zinc Phosphide Bait AG, Zinc YES bait on a NO station and some may be broadcast applied directly in alfalfa, barley, Phosphide, Wilco ZP variety of bait dry bean, potato, triticale, wheat, non-crop areas and rights of way, substances and non-residential lawns. Some of these commercial products are available from Agricultural Chemical Dealers and the USDA Pocatello Supply Depot. POCKET GOPHER PRODUCTS GENERAL USE PESTICIDES—POCKET GOPHERS THESE PRODUCTS ARE FOR HOMEOWNER/CONSUMER USE. Rodenticide Common Restricted Rodenticide Consumer Labeled Uses/Comments Active Ingredient Trade Names Use Pesticide Type Use Scoot Squirrel, Capsaicin and Systemic Tablets, Biopesticide, Use pellets in underground burrows. Can also place tablets in water NO YES Capsaicinoids Repellex Systemic Repellent and apply to the soil. Tablets Mole Go Granules, Repellent, Sweeny’s Mole & natural Castor Oil Gopher Repellent, NO product YES Broadcast on the soil surface and water into the soil. Tomcat Mole & exempt from Gopher Repellent federal review This product is formulated for consumer use in lawns, parks and non- Rozol Pocket Anticoagulant Chlorophacinone NO YES crop areas, apply underground for gophers. Only available in Gopher Bait bait packages one pound or less. Answer Control of Pocket Gophers, YES-- Sierra Gopher Bait, Anticoagulant .005% Manually place in underground burrows, in non-crop areas, Diphacinone Kaput-D Pocket NO bait concen- residential use. Only available in packages one pound or less. Gopher Bait, RCO tration Mole & Gopher Patrol Sulfur, sodium Revenge Rodent Place in underground burrow in lawns, parks, golf courses, meadows, nitrate and Smoke Bomb, The NO Smoke bombs YES and non-crop areas charcoal Giant Destroyer Some Omega Gopher Grain formulations Bait, Cooke Quick Acute poison are Must be placed in underground burrow and can only be used to Strychnine Action gopher Mix, on a bait such YES Restricted control gophers. Use in non-crop; non-food areas. Wilco Gopher Getter as grain Use Type-1 Bait Pesticides Some formulations Acute poison. YES, if These products are only sold in quantities of one pound or less. They are Non concen- Zinc Phosphide must be applied underground directly into the burrow by removing Restricted anticoagulant tration is the plug, or placing directly in the underground tunnel. Use bait 2% or less Pesticides RESTRICTED USE PESTICIDES—POCKET GOPHERS THESE PRODUCTS ARE FOR PROFESSIONAL APPLICATORS AND FARMERS/RANCHERS WITH A PESTICIDE LICENSE. THEY ARE NOT FOR HOMEOWNER/CONSUMER USE, PLEASE REFER TO THE TABLE ABOVE FOR CONSUMER PRODUCTS. Rodenticide Common Restricted Rodenticide Consumer Labeled Uses/Comments Active Ingredient Trade Names Use Pesticide Type Use Killz-all 60, Prohibited for use within 100 feet of any building utilized by humans Aluminum Phosfume, YES Fumigant NO or domestic animals. These rodenticides are for burrowing rodents Phosphide Phostoxin (pellets and can only be applied below ground. and tablets) Rozol Pocket Gopher Anticoagulant To be used as a manual bait or with a mechanized burrow builder. Chlorophacinone Bait Burrow Builder YES NO bait Sold in larger quantities. Formula RCO Patrol Burrow Builder Bait, Kaput-D Anticoagulant To be used as a manual bait or with a mechanized burrow builder. Diphacinone YES NO Burrow Pocket bait Sold in larger quantities. Gopher Bait Strychnine, Fort Some Dodge Gopher Bait, formula- Gopher-Go Bait, Acute poison tions are Must be placed in underground burrow and can only be used to Strychnine YES Pocket Gopher Bait, on bait general control gophers. Use in non-crop; non-food areas. Wilco Gopher Getter use Ag Bait pesticides Use in parks, lawns, ornamentals, rangeland, orchards, golf courses, Some Wilco Zinc Ag Bait, around agricultural buildings, nonfood crop areas, and uncultivated Acute poison. formula- Zinc Phosphide, ZP agricultural and nonagricultural areas. Moisture will cause the Non tions are Zinc Phosphide Ag Oats, ZP Ag YES product to volatilize or “gas off”. Do not apply before rain or an anticoagulant general Pellets, ZP Rodent irrigation event. Apply to the rodent burrow. These commercial bait use Bait Ag, Prozap products are available from Agricultural Chemical Dealers and the pesticides USDA Pocatello Supply Depot. .
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Rattus Norvegicus Polymorphic For. Warfarin Resistance
    Heredity (1979), 43(2), 239-246 RELATIVE FITNESS OF GENOTYPES IN A POPULATION OF RATTUS NORVEGICUS POLYMORPHIC FOR. WARFARIN RESISTANCE G. G. PARTRIDGE Department of Genetics, University of Liverpool, Liverpool L69 38X* Received11 .iii.79 SUMMARY Resistance to warfarin and an increased vitamin K requirement appear to be pleiotropic effects of the same allele (Rw 2).Ina natural population containing resistant individuals where the use of warfarin is discouraged the change in the frequency of resistance should reflect the relative fitnesses of the three possible genotypes. A large polymorphic population of rats was extensively poisoned with warfarin and the level of resistance monitored regularly for a period of 18 months after withdrawal of the poison. During this period the proportion of resistant animals in live-capture samples decreased significantly from approxi-. mately 80 per cent to 33 per cent. This decline is consistent with a hypothesis of reduced fitness of both RwZRw2andRw'Rw2 genotypes relative to Rw'Rw' under natural conditions. The relative fitnesses of these genotypes were calculated using an optimisation method based on least squares analysis. These estimates were: Rw2Rw2 (0.46), Rw'Rw2 (077) and Rw1Rw' (100). Homozygous resistant individuals were found in some of the samples, confirm- log that the Rw2 allele does not act as a recessive lethal, although it must be extremely disadvantageous. Some heterogeneity was observed in the proportion of resistant animals in samples taken from different areas of the farm building complex. This could reflect stochastic processes influencing the Rw2 allele frequency in small peripheral populations. 1. INTRODUCTION THE anticoagulant rodenticide warfarin was introduced into Britain in 1953 (Greaves, 1971).
    [Show full text]
  • Pharmacokinetics of Anticoagulant Rodenticides in Target and Non-Target Organisms Katherine Horak U.S
    University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln USDA National Wildlife Research Center - Staff U.S. Department of Agriculture: Animal and Plant Publications Health Inspection Service 2018 Pharmacokinetics of Anticoagulant Rodenticides in Target and Non-target Organisms Katherine Horak U.S. Department of Agriculture, [email protected] Penny M. Fisher Landcare Research Brian M. Hopkins Landcare Research Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/icwdm_usdanwrc Part of the Life Sciences Commons Horak, Katherine; Fisher, Penny M.; and Hopkins, Brian M., "Pharmacokinetics of Anticoagulant Rodenticides in Target and Non- target Organisms" (2018). USDA National Wildlife Research Center - Staff Publications. 2091. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/icwdm_usdanwrc/2091 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the U.S. Department of Agriculture: Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in USDA National Wildlife Research Center - Staff ubP lications by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. Chapter 4 Pharmacokinetics of Anticoagulant Rodenticides in Target and Non-target Organisms Katherine E. Horak, Penny M. Fisher, and Brian Hopkins 1 Introduction The concentration of a compound at the site of action is a determinant of its toxicity. This principle is affected by a variety of factors including the chemical properties of the compound (pKa, lipophilicity, molecular size), receptor binding affinity, route of exposure, and physiological properties of the organism. Many compounds have to undergo chemical changes, biotransformation, into more toxic or less toxic forms. Because of all of these variables, predicting toxic effects and performing risk assess- ments of compounds based solely on dose are less accurate than those that include data on absorption, distribution, metabolism (biotransformation), and excretion of the compound.
    [Show full text]
  • Controlling Pocket Gopher Damage to Conifer Seedlings D.S
    FOREST PROTECTION EC 1255 • Revised May 2003 $2.50 Controlling Pocket Gopher Damage to Conifer Seedlings D.S. deCalesta, K. Asman, and N. Allen Contents ocket gophers (or just plain Gopher habits and habitat.............. 1 P “gophers”) damage conifer seed- Control program ........................... 2 lings on thousands of Identifying the pest ......................2 acres in Washington, Assessing the need for treatment ...3 Idaho, and Oregon Damage control techniques ...........3 annually. They invade clearcuts and Applying controls .......................... 7 clip (cut off) roots or Figure 1.—Typical Oregon pocket gopher. Christmas tree plantations .............7 girdle (remove bark from) the bases of conifer seedlings and saplings, causing significant economic losses. Forest plantations ........................ 7 This publication will help you design a program to reduce or eliminate Summary .................................... 8 gopher damage to seedlings and saplings in your forest plantation or Christmas tree farm. Sources of supply ......................... 8 First, we describe pocket gophers, their habits, and habitats. Then we For further information .................. 8 discuss procedures for controlling pocket gopher damages—control techniques, their effectiveness and hazard(s) to the environment, and their use under a variety of tree-growing situations. Gopher habits and habitat Three species of pocket gopher can damage conifer seedlings. The two smaller ones, the northern pocket gopher and the Mazama pocket gopher, are 5 to 9 inches long and brown with some white beneath the chin and belly. The northern gopher is found east of the Cascade Mountains in Oregon and Washington and in Idaho; the Mazama lives in Oregon and Washington west of the Cascades. David S. deCalesta, former Exten- The Camas pocket gopher is similar looking, but larger (10 to 12 inches) sion wildlife specialist, and Kim than the two others.
    [Show full text]
  • A California Without Rodenticides: Challenges for Commensal Rodent Management in the Future
    Human–Wildlife Interactions 13(2):212–225, Fall 2019 • digitalcommons.usu.edu/hwi A California without rodenticides: challenges for commensal rodent management in the future Niamh Quinn, University of California Agriculture and Natural Resources, South Coast Research and Extension Center, Irvine, CA 92618, USA [email protected] Sylvia Kenmuir, BASF, 26 Davis Drive, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709, USA Laura Krueger, Orange County Mosquito and Vector Control District, Garden Grove, CA 92843, USA Abstract: Rodenticides are an essential tool in the integrated pest management of infestations of commensal rodents (Rattus norvegicus, R. rattus, and Mus musculus). With the introduction of Assembly Bill 1788, the California Ecosystems Protection Act of 2019, California is potentially facing a future with new restrictions on the use of anticoagulant rodenticides to manage commensal rodents in urban areas. Assembly Bill 1788 has been proposed specifically to protect predators from anticoagulant rodenticide poisoning and seeks to restrict the application of second-generation anticoagulant rodenticides (SGARs) for use in many urban and non-urban areas of California, USA. Exclusion and cultural practices, such as landscape management and sanitation (i.e., cleaning of property including but not limited to trash containment and removal, and drain sanitation), remain important and successful tools for managing rodent populations. However, increased exposure of wildlife to anticoagulant rodenticides has been detected California. Several animal species have been documented as having succumbed to rodenticide toxicosis. When rodents are killed by SGARs and consumed by predators, SGAR residues have been detected in the livers of predatory species. However, the effects of chronic, sublethal exposure to predators are not well understood.
    [Show full text]
  • RRAC Guidelines on Anticoagulant Rodenticide Resistance Management Editor: Rodenticide Resistance Action Committee (RRAC) of Croplife International Aim
    RRAC guidelines on Anticoagulant Rodenticide Resistance Management Editor: Rodenticide Resistance Action Committee (RRAC) of CropLife International Aim This document provides guidance to advisors, national authorities, professionals, practitioners and others on the nature of anticoagulant resistance in rodents, the identification of anticoagulant resistance, strategies for rodenticide application that will avoid the development of resistance and the management of resistance where it occurs. The Rodenticide Resistance Action Committee (RRAC) is a working group within the framework of CropLife International. Participating companies include: Bayer CropScience, BASF, LiphaTech S. A., PelGar, Rentokil Initial, Syngenta and Zapi. Senior technical specialists, with specific expertise in rodenticides, represent their companies on this committee. The RRAC is grateful to the following co-authors: Stefan Endepols, Alan Buckle, Charlie Eason, Hans-Joachim Pelz, Adrian Meyer, Philippe Berny, Kristof Baert and Colin Prescott. Photos provided by Stefan Endepols. Contents 1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................................................................................................. 2 2. Classification and history of rodenticide compounds ..............................................................................................3 3. Mode of action of anticoagulant rodenticides, resistance mechanisms, and resistance mutations ......................................................................................................6
    [Show full text]
  • Northern Cape Provincial Gazette Vol 15 No
    ·.:.:-:-:-:-:.::p.=~==~ ::;:;:;:;:::::t}:::::::;:;:::;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:::::;:::;:;:.-:-:.:-:.::::::::::::::::::::::::::-:::-:-:-:-: ..........•............:- ;.:.:.;.;.;.•.;. ::::;:;::;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;;:::::. '.' ::: .... , ..:. ::::::::::::::::::::~:~~~~::::r~~~~\~:~ i~ftfj~i!!!J~?!I~~~~I;Ii!!!J!t@tiit):fiftiIit\t~r\t ', : :.;.:.:.:.:.: ::;:;:::::;:::::::::::;:::::::::.::::;:::::::;:::::::::;:;:::;:;:;:;:: :.:.:.: :.:. ::~:}:::::::::::::::::::::: :::::::::::::::::::::tf~:::::::::::::::: ;:::;:::;:::;:;:;:::::::::;:;:::::: ::::::;::;:;:;:;=;:;:;:;:;:::;:;:;::::::::;:.: :.;.:.:.;.;.:.;.:.:-:.;.: :::;:' """"~'"W" ;~!~!"IIIIIII ::::::::::;:::::;:;:;:::;:::;:;:;:;:;:::::..;:;:;:::;: 1111.iiiiiiiiiiii!fillimiDw"""'8m\r~i~ii~:i:] :.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:':.:.:.::::::::::::::{::::::::::::;:: ;.;:;:;:;:t;:;~:~;j~Ij~j~)~( ......................: ;.: :.:.:.;.:.;.;.;.;.:.:.:.;.;.:.;.;.;.;.:.;.;.:.;.;.:.; :.:.;.:.: ':;:::::::::::-:.::::::;:::::;;::::::::::::: EXTRAORDINARY • BUITENGEWONE Provincial Gazette iGazethi YePhondo Kasete ya Profensi Provinsiale Koerant Vol. 15 KIMBERLEY, 19 DECEMBER 2008 DESEMBER No. 1258 PROVINCE OF THE NORTHERN CAPE 2 No. 1258 PROVINCIAL GAZETTE EXTRAORDINARY, 19 DECEMBER 2008 CONTENTS • INHOUD Page Gazette No. No. No. GENERAL NOTICE· ALGEMENE KENNISGEWING 105 Northern Cape Nature Conservation Bill, 2009: For public comment . 3 1258 105 Noord-Kaap Natuurbewaringswetontwerp, 2009: Vir openbare kommentaar . 3 1258 PROVINSIE NOORD-KAAP BUITENGEWONE PROVINSIALE KOERANT, 19 DESEMBER 2008 No.1258 3 GENERAL NOTICE NOTICE
    [Show full text]
  • The Naked Mole-Rat As an Animal Model in Biomedical Research: Current Perspectives
    Open Access Animal Physiology Dovepress open access to scientific and medical research Open Access Full Text Article REVIEW The naked mole-rat as an animal model in biomedical research: current perspectives Laura-Nadine Schuhmacher Abstract: The naked mole-rat (NMR) is a subterranean rodent that has gained significant Zoé Husson attention from the biomedical research community in recent years as molecular mechanisms Ewan St. John Smith underlying its unusual biology start to be unraveled. With very low external mortality, NMRs have an unusually long lifespan while showing no signs of aging, such as neuro- Department of Pharmacology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK degeneration or cancer. Furthermore, living underground in large colonies (100 to 300 animals), results in comparatively high carbon dioxide and low oxygen levels, from which NMRs have evolved extreme resistance to both hypoxia and hypercapnia. In this paper we have summarized the latest developments in NMR research and its impact on biomedical research, with the aim of providing a sound background that will inform and inspire further For personal use only. investigations. Keywords: naked mole-rat, longevity, cancer, hypoxia, nociception, pain Introduction The naked mole-rat (NMR) (Heterocephalus glaber) is a subterranean mammal, which has recently gained interest from scientists across a variety of research fields. Unlike the majority of mammals, NMRs are poikilothermic and eusocial, ie, are cold-blooded and have a single breeding female within a colony.1 In addition to these features, which have limited biomedical translatability, NMRs have also evolved several physiological adaptations to habituate to their extreme environmental conditions, which have led researchers to study this mammal with the hypothesis Open Access Animal Physiology downloaded from https://www.dovepress.com/ by 131.111.184.102 on 07-Sep-2017 that by understanding the extreme biology of NMRs, more will be understood about normal mammalian physiology.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix B. Brodifacoum Papers That Were Accepted for ECOTOX
    Appendix B. Brodifacoum Papers that Were Accepted for ECOTOX Acceptable for ECOTOX and OPP 1. Abou El-Khear, R. K. (2005). Evaluation and Records of Rome Anticoagulant Rodenticides Against Wild Rats Under the Reclaimed Lands Conditions. Alexandria Sci. Exch. 26: 142-147. EcoReference No.: 153588 Chemical of Concern: BDF,CPC,DFM,PPCP,WFN; Habitat: T; Effect Codes: POP; Code: LITE EVAL CODED (BDF,CPC), NO SURVEY (PPCP,WFN). 2. Ahmad, M. S. and Munir, S. (1990). Comparative Evaluation of Three Anticoagulants Brodifacoum, Bromadialone and Flucoumafen Against Indian Gerbil, Tatera indica. Pak.J.Zool. 22: 421-426. EcoReference No.: 75417 Chemical of Concern: BDF,BDL; Habitat: T; Effect Codes: MOR,BEH; Rejection Code: LITE EVAL CODED(BDF,BDL). 3. Ahmad, N. and Parshad, V. R. (1991). Evaluation of Rodenticidal Baits in Fields of Sugarcane (Saccharum officinarum). Indian J.Agric.Sci. 61: 281-284. EcoReference No.: 75653 Chemical of Concern: ZnP,BDF,BDL; Habitat: T; Effect Codes: POP; Rejection Code: LITE EVAL CODED(ZnP,BDF,BDL). 4. Ahmad, N., SHEIKHER, C., and Guraya, S. S. (1989). Rodenticidal Baitings in Wheat Fields of the Garhwal Himalayas. Trop.Pest Manag. 35: 282-285. EcoReference No.: 75606 Chemical of Concern: ZnP,BDF,BDL; Habitat: T; Effect Codes: POP; Rejection Code: LITE EVAL CODED(ZnP,BDF,BDL). 5. Alterio, N., Brown, K., and Moller, H. (1997). Secondary Poisoning of Mustelids in a New Zealand Nothofagus Forest. J.Zool.(London) 243: 863-869. EcoReference No.: 75652 Chemical of Concern: BDF; Habitat: T; Effect Codes: POP,MOR; Rejection Code: LITE EVAL CODED(BDF). 6. Alterio, N. and Moller, H.
    [Show full text]
  • Persistent Organic Pollutants
    PERSISTENT ORGANIC POLLUTANTS An Assessment Report on: DDT-Aldrin-Dieldrin-Endrin-Chlordane Heptachlor-Hexachlorobenzene Mirex-Toxaphene Polychlorinated Biphenyls Dioxins and Furans Prepared by: L. Ritter, K.R. Solomon, J. Forget Canadian Network of Toxicology Centres 620 Gordon Street Guelph ON Canada and M. Stemeroff and C.O'Leary Deloitte and Touche Consulting Group 98 Macdonell St., Guelph ON Canada For: The International Programme on Chemical Safety (IPCS) within the framework of the Inter-Organization Programme for the Sound Management of Chemicals (IOMC) This report is produced for the International Programme on Chemical Safety (IPCS). The work is carried out within the framework of the Inter-Organization Programme for the Sound Management of Chemicals (IOMC). The report does not necessarily represent the decisions or the stated policy of the United Nations Environment Programme, the International Labour Organisation, or the World Health Organization. The International Programme on Chemical Safety (IPCS) is a joint venture of the United Nations Environment Programme, the International Labour Organisation, and the World Health Organization. The main objective of the IPCS is to carry out and disseminate evaluations of the effects of chemicals on human health and the quality of the environment. Supporting activities include the development of epidemiological, experimental laboratory, and risk-assessment methods that could produce internationally comparable results, and the development of human resources in the field of chemical safety. Other activities carried out by the IPCS include the development of know-how for coping with chemical accidents, strengthening capabilities for prevention of an response to chemical accidents and their follow-up, coordination of laboratory testing and epidemiological studies, and promotion of research on the mechanisms of the biological action of chemicals.
    [Show full text]
  • Soil Movement by Burrowing Mammals: a Review Comparing Excavation Size and Rate to Body Mass of Excavators
    Soil movement by burrowing mammals: a review comparing excavation size and rate to body mass of excavators Natalie S Haussmann Department of Geography, Geoinformatics and Meteorology, University of Pretoria, South Africa Corresponding author: Natalie S Haussmann, Department of Geography, Geoinformatics and Meteorology, University of Pretoria, Private Bag X20, Hatfield, South Africa. Email: [email protected] Tel: +27 (21) 420 4049 Abstract Mammal burrowing plays an important role in soil translocation and habitat creation in many environments. As a consequence, many burrowing mammals have at some point been studied in an ecosystem engineering context. From a geomorphological point of view, one of the focus areas of burrowing mammal research is on the amount of soil that is excavated and the rate at which this happens. As such, reviews exist on the volumes and rates of sediment removal by burrowing mammals in specific environments or for specific groups of species. Here a standardised comparison of mammal burrowing across a broad range of burrowing mammal species and environments is provided, focussing on both burrow volume and excavation rate. Through an ISI Web of Science-based literature search, articles presenting estimates of burrow volumes and/or excavation rate were identified. Relationships between species body size and burrow volume/excavation rate were explored and the influence of sociality and method of burrow volume estimation was assessed. The results show that, although bigger species construct 1 bigger burrows, it is the smaller species that remove more sediment per unit time at larger, site- level spatial scales. Burrow volume estimates are, however, independent of species sociality (solitary vs group-living) and method of burrow volume estimation (excavation-based vs mound- based).
    [Show full text]
  • Additional Mitigation Measures for Rodenticides
    Questions and Answers – Additional Mitigation Measures for Rodenticides About the Evaluation of Rodenticides 1. What are rodenticides? Rodenticides are pest control products registered for controlling mice, rats and other rodents that pose threats to public health, critical habitats, native plants and animals, crops, and food supplies. 2. Why did Health Canada re-evaluate rodenticides? As required under the Pest Control Product Act, Health Canada’s Pest Management Regulatory Agency (PMRA) conducts re-evaluations of older pesticides to ensure they meet modern health and safety standards. As scientific knowledge evolves and new information becomes available, the PMRA requires that registered pesticides be re-evaluated according to modern risk assessment approaches. The PMRA re-evaluated six rodenticides (brodifacoum, bromadiolone, chlorophacinone, diphacinone, warfarin and zinc phosphide) and published Re-evaluation Decision Documents (RRD2006-11 and RVD2007-01) in 2006 and 2007, respectively. The public was consulted prior to finalizing these decision documents (PACR2004-27 and PACR2006-08). 3. Why are additional mitigation measures required following re-evaluation? In 2010, the PMRA required additional protective measures for several rodenticides containing the following active ingredients: brodifacoum, bromadiolone, bromethalin, chlorophacinone, diphacinone, difethialone, warfarin and zinc phosphide, as part of an overall risk-reduction strategy for rodenticides in Canada. The name of the active ingredient contained in a rodenticide product is listed on the product label under “guarantee”. Rodenticides are highly acutely toxic compounds, and can be used in residential and agricultural settings. Additional protective measures are warranted in order to prevent exposure of children, pets and non-target wildlife to these chemicals. Manufacturers have until December 31, 2012 to have new labelling in place.
    [Show full text]
  • Defending Nature Against Rodenticides
    Defending Nature Against Rodenticides LAW 391D Topics in Environmental Law Green Rights & Warrior Lawyers Marie Turcott December 18, 2019 Page 12 I. INTRODUCTION: RATS, RODENTICIDES, AND RIGHTS OF NATURE .................... 2 II. THE LEGAL FRAMEWORK FOR PESTICIDE REGULATION IN CANADA ............ 5 A. Federal Regulations ............................................................................................................................ 6 1. Developments in Federal Regulation of Rodenticides ...................................................................... 8 B. Provincial Regulation ....................................................................................................................... 10 C. Municipal Role .................................................................................................................................. 13 III. THE USE OF SECOND-GENERATION ANTICOAGULANT RODENTICIDES IS INCONSISTENT WITH THE CURRENT REGULATORY FRAMEWORK .................... 14 A. There is Reasonable Certainty that Harm Results from SGAR Use ........................................... 16 1. Risks to Nature: Wildlife and the Environment .............................................................................. 16 i. Direct poisoning of non-target primary consumers .................................................................................... 16 ii. Indirect poisoning of secondary consumer predator and scavenger species .............................................. 18 iii. Poisoning of the environment
    [Show full text]