For at least a decade, California has tried to restrict the use of rat poison to prevent it from killing all kinds of creatures other than rats. So far, it hasn't worked.
If wild animals prey on rats that have ingested anticoagulant rodenticides, the rats may die or become ill from the toxin as well. Poisoning continues up the food chain from predator to predator. Endangered species such as mountain lions, bobcats, foxes, coyotes, hawks, northern spotted owls and San Joaquin red foxes are killed by these rodenticides or become sick enough to move through their environments. Contained inside. You can search for food and cross roads efficiently with darts.
The anticoagulant rat poison didn't kill P-22, Griffith Park's beloved mountain lion, but it appeared on his body several times and once caused a mange attack that he was lucky enough to receive treatment for. was completed. After he was euthanized in 2022, several different rodenticides were found in his body, including diphacinone, a first-generation anticoagulant. Both of these rodenticides kill by causing internal bleeding. The older first-generation version is slow-acting and requires the rat to eat the poison many times before it dies. The second generation version allows you to kill rats more quickly.
Ten years ago, the state banned commercial sale of stronger, faster-acting, second-generation anticoagulant rodenticides, allowing only professional exterminators to use them. In 2020, the state Legislature voted to extend the ban to commercial uses, with the exception of some agricultural settings and public health emergencies.
However, the law still allows consumers and extermination professionals to use first-generation rodenticides, which, although less quickly effective, are effective against rodent predators, such as birds, mountain lions, and other rodent predators. It has strong toxicity that can make living things sick and in some cases even cause death. A recent study of red-tailed hawks that ate prairie dogs poisoned with diphacinone showed signs of blood clotting and impaired thermoregulation.
Despite these efforts, non-target animals continue to be poisoned by rodenticides, whether by accident or improper use. Years of wildlife necropsies have shown that wild animals and pets continue to be collateral damage of these toxins. Last year, the state Legislature adopted a moratorium on the use of diphacinone, a first-generation rodenticide most commonly found in poisoned wildlife, except in agricultural settings and public health emergencies. . The ban took effect in January, so it hasn't had an impact yet, but there's still much work to be done to stop this deadly toxin.
Assembly Bill 2552, introduced this year by Rep. Laura Friedman (D-Glendale), could help curb the use of banned rodenticides by giving all Californians the power to act as enforcers. be. The bill, sponsored by wildlife advocacy groups, would allow the public to sue individuals and companies who illegally use banned rodenticides. State and county authorities are tasked with enforcing rat poison laws, but they cannot begin to stop all violations of the law.
The bill also extends the ban to the remaining first-generation rodenticides, warfarin and chlorophacinone. It also prohibits the use of all restricted rodenticides in or within 5,000 feet of parks and wildlife refuges.
This bill is critical to removing these toxins from the environment, which are known to be deadly to wild animals and pets, and poisonous to humans, usually children.
And they are not needed. Covering trash cans, sealing entry points to homes and buildings, and using non-toxic rat poisons and traps that don't cause pain are all safer options for controlling rat populations. Fertility management products are also used. One type is a plant-based liquid used in bait stations that reduces fertility in rats (which reproduce in large numbers). The liquid, which rats find delicious, does not contain hormones or chemicals that would harm the rats' predators. Various trials conducted in urban areas around the country have shown dramatic results, including a 90% reduction in rats after a few months.
The bill's language emphasizes that animals can experience pain, stress and fear and that animals have the “right to live a life free from toxicity.”
That language does not imbue animals with rights that override human rights. If so, these rodenticides would be banned without exception. But it emphasizes an important point: humans should strive to minimize animal suffering, especially when it is unnecessary. That applies here.
