Robert's Rants
Robert's Rants
A personal blog on the Canadian pesticide industry and other pet peeves and interests

Hands tied, but still doing the best we can! Part 2

So in my previous Rant I touched on the fact that Canadian Invasive Species Experts are really restricted in what tools they have available.  And does that restriction of available products make us work smarter or just make us work twice as hard to get the same thing done?  Keep in mind I’m only doing a comparison to our counterparts in the US.

So are we doing a crappy job, or just using more time, labor, expense to do an “acceptable” job for the customer?  And not getting paid for it.

That’s the gist of the Rant.

Is it a real fact or just Robert going off on tangent?

Let’s look at the leading product for Structural Pest Control in both countries.  Made at the same plant in the US, comes right out of the same spigot.  The manufacturing plant making Demand CS (capsule suspension for those that care) fills a couple bah-zillion bottles for the US PCO, then at the end of the run puts through the 9 bottles for Canada… with our special restrictions, dual language, and other differentiating marks.  Okay a couple more than 9 bottles.

Here’s the label statement on Demand CS for Canada…just listing the insect pests and rate.  (pardon my sloppy Snippet job).  Note bed bugs is on a different section.

(Always read and follow the entire label!!!!! – duh)

AND NOW (drum roll) here is the label summation of uses on the registered EPA label. (this is not legal in Canada…and is being shown for demonstration purposes only…double duh)

US EPA registration

WOW….that’s about all I can say…WOW.

You can count the pests if you like, as there seems to be a bit of a difference.  Or just stare at the label in wonder.

BUT….notice something that is critical to efficacy, control, and the amount of pesticides put into the environment?

THE RATES!  Canadian ISE/PCO’s are relegated to one rate (0.03%).   For 8 different species.  Okay…we can live with that…

Our friends in the US can use 3 different rates, based on the insect pest and how difficult they are to control.  Now that makes sense.  Use the lowest rate for one pest, or level of infestation.  The highest for those jobs where the roaches are cooking their own pizza.

AND…for lesser infestations, using the product in a maintenance service, you can use the LOWER rate!  That makes even more sense.  Why use more product that has been scientifically determined to work at the rate prescribed?  Reduce the overall amount of pesticide put into the environment.

Novel idea there.

WHY the big difference.

That’s a question I don’t think anyone can answer.   And as all good Canadians we never ask “Why”? Maybe the supplier and PMRA know.  The PMRA asks a lot of questions, the supplier doesn’t want to spend a fortune on answering those questions again and again and in French.  Especially when they’ve answered those same questions in a 100 hundred other countries.

Are the existing tests insufficient?  Is a german cockroach affected the same as an oriental?  Can you prove it? More money needed?  Or is the data in one country just not acceptable in another?  We’re Canada by the way.

More money…

So back to my “economy” argument.  No market, no profit, no investment.

When will we get to be a real Global “village”?   Is this really a battle between countries as to which one is keeping their citizens healthier than the others?

Or is it because the market for general pest control in the US is $300,000,000 and only $3,000,000 in Canada?

Who is “right” in this?   You really can’t say one thing is perfectly fine in one country but 30 miles across the border it’s not?

But we do…because our government believes they are smarter than all other governments combined.

NAH….it’s based on who wants to pay.

Demand CS.

So here we have a great product that will solve a lot of problems, and at a use rate that is so low… due to the product activity… it could reduce the pounds of active pesticide ingredient used in the whole country.  If we had the option to use it “properly”.

But I better be careful before someone decides that we should just use the 0.015% rate for everything.

Gosh…looks like I might be heading to a Part 3!