Regulating Fly Lights: Isn’t this contradictory of the PCP Act?
Here’s the gist of the issue: PMRA wants to increase revenue, or lose people. Since they’ve eliminated more pesticides and/or uses than they have registered, their responsibility is shrinking. Less to keep busy hands and minds…never mind.
By expanding their scope, outside their remit under the Act, and requiring registration or certification or just requesting data, on everything that says “pest control” they can increase their revenue.
Voila! No, not Sobey’s, just voila.
Here is the link to the PCP Act:
Read down a bit to find:
for example by facilitating access to pest control products that pose lower risks, and encouraging the development and use of alternative, non-toxic, ecological pest control approaches, strategies and products.
So here’s the reality. There are 3 major FILT players in Canada. BTW that stands for Flying Insect Light Trap. Plus a couple wannabes like Catchmaster and Pelsis.
We bring in numerous lights from the 3 companies, all major, respected, global businesses. Zappers, glue, sconces, 2 sided, 1 bulb, 8 bulbs, 2’ long, 8’ long. Well you get the idea.
Pestwest, Gilbert and Brandenburg
About 53 different products, each with a different design for a different need. And some competition.
Now when Pestwest, Gilbert and Brandenburg are told they need to register each light, and provide data showing each and every insect they work on, and then PAY a small (ahem) fee, what happens to that number above? The 53 lights dummy?
All 3 will say, “hmmm, the whole market up there is $ X and this will eat my profit and time, so guess what Canada!”
We’ll end up with 2 suppliers, 5 lights, and all just registered for house flies.
So how is that in keeping with the Act, when you are discouraging safer, non-pesticidal products?
am I missing it again?
How does that encourage development of safer products? Even safer pesticide products?
Doomsday thinking 🤔 You read it here first.
it’s just Robert ranting away