PEST CONTROL
Food Hygiene Regulations. Environmental Health Officers have the power to shut down kitchens or issue fines if pests are found. The Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 outlines a
broader requirement on employers to ensure the health & safety of their staff and visitors. A failure to manage a pest infestation can be seen as a breach of this duty. Beyond enforcement, organisations can face fines
or even prosecution for having pest problems. External facilities management companies which are contracted to manage these issues on behalf of healthcare settings will often have a clear responsibility to ensure a best practice approach to hygiene – with pest management an integral aspect of that.
Irrespective of whether the setting is in the public or private sector, it is worth remembering that in a world where nearly everyone has a camera with them every day, a single photo showing evidence of pests can be uploaded and transmitted nationwide – and beyond – in a matter of seconds, via social media. This can create a huge reputational issue, eating up valuable staff time and ruining many years of hard work building up a strong and respected image.
The growing issue of rodenticide in rodents It is wrong to assume a particular type of treatment will be completely effective in dealing with an unwanted population of rodents. To preserve themselves, it is natural for any species to develop a resistance to a particular rodenticide or chemical – and this is the case when it comes to rats and mice. Even this is not straightforward, as there are regional differences between the types of rodenticides to which some rodents may be resistant. Research in this area is significant and ongoing,
with the most prominent organisation in the field being the Rodenticide Resistance Action Committee (RRAC), a working group within the framework of CropLife International. The work of RRAC has developed a map detailing areas where rodents have built up resistance. A clear example of this comes from London, where the local mouse population has developed a high level of resistance to both difenacoum or bromadiolone-based products, meaning attempts to treat infestations in the capital with these products are likely to prove futile and a waste of money. It is a similar story with the local rat population in Reading, who have proved highly resistant to bromadiolone. Organisations risk wasting time and effort by seeking
to tackle a problem with the wrong products. This makes it vital that those charged with addressing potential infestations of this kind have the appropriate knowledge of products to which pests have developed resistance and can recommend and use suitable alternatives which will have the desired effect.
Current and evolving pest control practice – what you need to know All pest control operatives must hold current Campaign for Responsible Rodenticide Use (CRRU) certification. Since 1 January 2025, second-generation anticoagulant rodenticides (SGARs) are banned in open areas, restricting their use to indoors and directly around building perimeters, to protect wildlife. A further example here is the use of adhesive boards for catching rats and mice. The general use of these trapping systems has been severely restricted since 2024 in England & banned in Scotland as of July 2026 as they are deemed inhumane, and their deployment is now only permitted with the granting of a special licence, which
itself comes at a cost premium. This means pest control companies are having to use other methods of trapping, which come with their own requirements for reporting. Current regulation is much more stringent, not just with the types of bait and trapping systems used, but with pest control companies needing to assess what bait has been taken before adding more in a particular location. Overall, the industry has seen a shift from individual, remote traps to routine 24-7 monitoring, with the availability of traps which provide an alert to the pest control company when a rodent accesses them – enabling them to attend site and remove the rodent swiftly rather than checking individual bait boxes.
A strategy for success Prevention always beats cure. The presence of pests should not be seen as inevitable, and the use of a specialist company to deal with an infestation should ideally be seen as a last resort, rather than a necessary evil to counter an ultimately insoluble problem. A key point to note is
that while many specialist pest control companies are very good at what they do, their offering is often limited to the provision of remedial action to tackle an existing issue, rather than the in-depth strategic approach and advice needed to minimise – and ideally eliminate – the risk of an infestation in the first place. Facilities managers – employed or external – juggle competing priorities and are not necessarily pest experts, making specialist advice crucial. It is vital to understand
October 2026 Health Estate Journal 163
Mouse droppings in wall void.
Mouse droppings around box.
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116 |
Page 117 |
Page 118 |
Page 119 |
Page 120 |
Page 121 |
Page 122 |
Page 123 |
Page 124 |
Page 125 |
Page 126 |
Page 127 |
Page 128 |
Page 129 |
Page 130 |
Page 131 |
Page 132 |
Page 133 |
Page 134 |
Page 135 |
Page 136 |
Page 137 |
Page 138 |
Page 139 |
Page 140 |
Page 141 |
Page 142 |
Page 143 |
Page 144 |
Page 145 |
Page 146 |
Page 147 |
Page 148 |
Page 149 |
Page 150 |
Page 151 |
Page 152 |
Page 153 |
Page 154 |
Page 155 |
Page 156 |
Page 157 |
Page 158 |
Page 159 |
Page 160 |
Page 161 |
Page 162 |
Page 163 |
Page 164 |
Page 165 |
Page 166 |
Page 167 |
Page 168 |
Page 169 |
Page 170 |
Page 171 |
Page 172 |
Page 173 |
Page 174 |
Page 175 |
Page 176 |
Page 177 |
Page 178 |
Page 179 |
Page 180 |
Page 181 |
Page 182 |
Page 183 |
Page 184 |
Page 185 |
Page 186 |
Page 187 |
Page 188
