Back in 2016, Matt Garwood and his team at MG Pest Control switched over their sites to be fully compliant with the CRRU Code of Best Practice and started to monitor pest activity to see what impact it would make ON pest activity.

To be fully compliant with the CRRU guidelines, they put non-toxic monitoring blocks into sites with no activity and then only administered FGAR or SGAR rodenticides where there was confirmed rodent activity, or in a high-risk area, for example, bin stores, receiving areas for large warehouses and cavity bait lines. Matt then continued to monitor the rodent activity levels of some of his largest contracts. The red line indicates where the change to complete CRRU compliance takes place.

Matt said, “If you look at each graph, you can clearly see that the CRRU Code of Best Practice delivers better rodent control when managed case by case [compared to pre-stewardship methods]. The peaks of activity are not as high, and the activity period is not so prolonged. Activity is controlled more quickly when being CRRU COBP compliant.”

MG Pest Control spoke to their clients and explained why rodenticide stewardship was necessary and then moved all their contracts from 8 visits to 12 visits a year meaning they could continue to use FGAR or SGAR bait in accordance with CRRU guidelines. A bi-product of this seems to be that they’ve achieved quicker more sustainable levels of control.

 If you haven’t already moved over to a CRRU compliant service practice – then you need to. It’s the law by means of the label conditions. As well as significantly reducing the risk to non-target animals, there’s a sales opportunity as you’ll need to visit sites more often to be able to use FGAR or SGAR bait. We’ve saved money as we don’t use as much SGAR or FGAR, thereby reducing costs, and crucially it’s better for the clients as they’re seeing better control of rodents.

Matt Garwood, MG Pest Control

Scott Johnstone
Communications Officer

5 May 2017  |  PPC87

Source: PPC87