Anticoagulant Rodenticide Mitigation Informal Public Comment / Taller público informal del DPR sobre la mitigación - 9/24/25

380 Results

Sort:

Comment From: Rachel Barasch

10/22/25 @ 9:23 AM
Do not weaken regulation to stop anticoagulant pesticides! Protect our birds. Foxes, etc.
No attachments

Comment From: Anonymous Anonymous

10/22/25 @ 8:25 AM
I strongly urge DPR to keep the current protections in place—no anticoagulant rodenticides should be allowed except during a declared public health or environmental emergency. Rolling back AB 1788, AB 2552, or AB 1322 would be a huge step backward. T...↓
No attachments

Comment From: Srinivasan Raman

10/22/25 @ 8:07 AM
Please do not allow anticoagulant rodenticides, except during a declared public health or environmental emergency (current law),

No rollback of AB 1788, AB 2552, or AB 1322 is acceptable, and California must invest in ecological rodent control to pr...↓
No attachments

Comment From: Amanda Newlove

10/22/25 @ 6:56 AM
No anticoagulant rodenticides should be allowed, except during a declared public health or environmental emergency (current law),

No rollback of AB 1788, AB 2552, or AB 1322 is acceptable, and

California must invest in ecological rodent control to ...↓
No attachments

Comment From: Adelaide Nye

10/22/25 @ 2:31 AM
I say 40 year member of the Sierra Club, I strongly oppose this new proposed mission to use anticoagulant rodenticides. Our church carefully added a Barnell box in recent years to see if we can get some reduction of ground squirrel burrowing in our f...↓
No attachments

Comment From: Angela Giannini

10/22/25 @ 12:09 AM
Please do not allow these types of poisons for rodents because other animals such as owls, cats, coyotes, mountain lions, hawks etc can eat the rodents then they can die.
We personally use Clark's pest control and they set the old fashioned traps. ...↓
No attachments

Comment From: Kirsty Stevenson

10/21/25 @ 10:42 PM
No anticoagulant rodenticides should be allowed, except during a declared public health or environmental emergency (current law),

No rollback of AB 1788, AB 2552, or AB 1322 is acceptable, and

California must invest in ecological rodent control to ...↓
No attachments

Comment From: Kristin Morgan

10/21/25 @ 10:25 PM
I strongly urge there remain (or increase!) restrictions on anti-coagulant rodent poisons due to the danger to pets and wildlife. I've had cats poisoned by eating rats that had eaten the bait, and it's just not worth the cost to the other animals.
No attachments

Comment From: Meera P

10/21/25 @ 9:57 PM

No anticoagulant rodenticides should be allowed, except during a declared public health or environmental emergency (current law),

No rollback of AB 1788, AB 2552, or AB 1322 is acceptable, and

California must invest in ecological rodent control to ...↓
No attachments

Comment From: Barbara Bartoshuk

10/21/25 @ 9:49 PM
No anticoagulant rodenticides should be allowed, except during a declared public health or environmental emergency (current law),

No rollback of AB 1788, AB 2552, or AB 1322 is acceptable, and

California must invest in ecological rodent control to ...↓
No attachments

Comment From: VICKI PELTON

10/21/25 @ 9:43 PM
Do not allow >100 days of poison use. This would continue contamination of predators, pets, and ecosystems.
No attachments

Comment From: Elizabeth Johnson

10/21/25 @ 9:31 PM
Please do not weaken current restrictions on anticoagulant use for rat poison. It is so dangerous to wildlife (birds of prey, etc) and extremely dangerous for our beloved pets.

No attachments

Comment From: Rosemary Bernstein

10/21/25 @ 8:59 PM
The birds and larger predators in our local wildlife ecosystems deserve to be protected from these poisons. Please do not allow these important restrictions to be rolled back.
No attachments

Comment From: Inna Magner

10/21/25 @ 8:45 PM
California is leading the way in taking out of law and banning anticoagulant rodenticides from our environment, this is such as important step in protecting wildlife, birds of prey, our pets and any bypassing non target animals. The complete banning ...↓
No attachments

Comment From: Chris MacIntosh

10/21/25 @ 8:41 PM
Please do not roll back AB 1788, AB 2552, or AB 1322. These were put in to protect wildlife and pets and avoid poisons that Californians have said they do not want used.
California should invest in ecological rodent control to protect raptors and pr...↓
No attachments

Comment From: Thomas Carlino

10/21/25 @ 8:37 PM
No anticoagulant rodenticides should be allowed, except during a declared public health or environmental emergency as stated by current law. No rollback of AB 1788, AB 2552, or AB 1322 is acceptable, and California must invest in ecological rodent co...↓
No attachments

Comment From: Elizabeth Lennie

10/21/25 @ 7:56 PM
I am horrified to hear that our state may roll back regulation of certain rat/rodent poisons that are so bad for our local wildlife and even our children...and everyone! I have been so happy to see both barn owls and great horned owls reappearing in...↓
No attachments

Comment From: Stacey Brown

10/21/25 @ 6:20 PM
To weaken this ban will devastate raptors but other wildlife as well. Please don't rollback or weaken current restrictions.
No attachments

Comment From: Hsin-Yi Lee

10/21/25 @ 4:18 PM
I urge the Department of Pesticide Regulations to uphold California's existing protections against anticoagulant rodenticides and reject any rollback of AB 1788, AB 2552, or AB 1322.
Anticoagulant rodenticides should only be permitted during declared...↓
No attachments

Comment From: Nickolaus Sackett

10/21/25 @ 3:08 PM
I write on behalf of Social Compassion in Legislation and our thousands of supporters in California. We urge the Department of Pesticide Regulation to adopt a full ban on anticoagulant rodenticides. These poisons cause prolonged, agonizing deaths and...↓
No attachments

Comment From: Monica Donovan

10/21/25 @ 2:20 PM
I truly believe we would be better off without these rodenticides since they contribute to killing many more species than rodents.
I believe we need to keep protections in place for the overall good.
No attachments

Comment From: Karen Rohde

10/21/25 @ 12:32 PM
California Department of Pesticide Regulations (DPR),

I am writing to ask you to STOP a rollback of regulations regarding anticoagulant rodenticides, the powerful rat poisons whose use is limited by state laws. A rollback would go against Californi...↓
No attachments

Comment From: Emilie Strauss

10/21/25 @ 12:00 PM
I understand from Center for Biological Diversity that DPR is considering legalization of anticoagulant rat poison. The two pairs of Barn Owls in my residential neighborhood are gone, although their nest trees remain. We all know that rat poison kill...↓
No attachments

Comment From: Dudley Carlson

10/21/25 @ 11:19 AM
No anticoagulant rodenticides should be allowed, except during a declared public health or environmental emergency (current law),
No rollback of AB 1788, AB 2552, or AB 1322 is acceptable, and
California must invest in ecological rodent control to pr...↓
No attachments

Comment From: Hita Bambhania-Modha

10/21/25 @ 10:33 AM
* No anticoagulant rodenticides should be allowed.

* California must invest in ecological rodent control to protect raptors and predators.
* Anticoagulants are toxic and poisonous, killing the very wildlife that naturally controls rodents.

* DPR is...↓
No attachments

Comment From: David Simon

10/21/25 @ 9:15 AM
I understand that rodents in general and rats in particular can be a big problem. However, anticoagulent rodenticides kill not only the rodents but the animals that prey on them right up the food chain. This is not the technique we should rely upon...↓
No attachments

Comment From: Tina Swanson

10/21/25 @ 8:07 AM
* No anticoagulant rodenticides should be allowed, except during a declared public health or environmental emergency (current law),

* No rollback of AB 1788, AB 2552, or AB 1322 is acceptable, and

* California must invest in ecological rodent contr...↓
No attachments

Comment From: Margaret Hinebaugh

10/20/25 @ 7:05 PM
I am strongly against the DPR increasing the limit of anticoagulant rodenticides (AR) so that they can be used for more than 100 days a year. In fact, no anticoagulant rodenticides should be allowed at all, except during a declared public health or e...↓
No attachments

Comment From: Joseph Coha

10/20/25 @ 6:33 PM
The DPR has requested feedback on specific aspects of the proposed regulations to modify FAC 12978.7 and ENF 24-20.

I oppose the entirety of this proposal that appears to revoke the banning of most uses of first-generation anticoagulant rodenticide...↓
No attachments

Comment From: Helena Cohen

10/20/25 @ 5:49 PM
Rodenticide use should be outlawed completely, not relaxed!!! This would be a crime against the natural world and all the creatures that live in it. Please take the long view not some short term fix.
No attachments

Comment From: Emmanuelle Crombez

10/20/25 @ 5:39 PM
No anticoagulant rodenticides should be allowed, except during a declared public health or environmental emergency ( as stated in the current law)
No rollback of AB 1788, AB 2552, or AB 1322 is acceptable, and California must invest in ecological rod...↓
No attachments

Comment From: Nicole VIDMAR

10/20/25 @ 4:32 PM


No anticoagulant rodenticides should be allowed, except during a declared public health or environmental emergency (current law),

No rollback of AB 1788, AB 2552, or AB 1322 is acceptable, and California must invest in ecological rodent control to ...↓
No attachments

Comment From: marilyn Waterman

10/20/25 @ 4:02 PM
I urge you to employ other ways than poison to eliminate rats. As a society, we need to protect our country's wildlife - now and for future generations. Please take a courageous stand and do the right thing.
Thank you,
Marilyn Waterman
No attachments

Comment From: Anonymous Anonymous

10/20/25 @ 3:59 PM
I am shocked that the State of California would take such a harmful step which would endanger our public health and that of our pets and wildlife which are so important to our future. Please reconsider and shame on those who put profit, other gains a...↓
No attachments

Comment From: Alec Moore

10/20/25 @ 3:55 PM
No anticoagulant rodenticides should be allowed, except during a declared public health or environmental emergency. No rollback of AB 1788, AB 2552, or AB 1322 is acceptable. California must invest in ecological rodent control to protect raptors and ...↓
No attachments

Comment From: Stephen McHenry

10/20/25 @ 3:41 PM
No anticoagulant rodenticides should be allowed, except during a declared public health or environmental emergency (current law),

No rollback of AB 1788, AB 2552, or AB 1322 is acceptable, and

California must invest in ecological rodent con...↓
No attachments

Comment From: Carolyn Straub

10/20/25 @ 3:38 PM
No anticoagulant rodenticides should be allowed, except during a declared public health or environmental emergency (current law),

No rollback of AB 1788, AB 2552, or AB 1322 is acceptable, and

California must invest in ecological rodent con...↓
No attachments

Comment From: Connie Nelson

10/20/25 @ 3:31 PM
I am strongly opposed to your proposal to allow the use of anticoagulant rodenticides for 105 days in a year. AB 1788, AB 2552, and AB 1322 were passed to protect wildlife, not poison it, and DPR should abide by them.

Anticoagulants are toxic and n...↓
No attachments

Comment From: Seth Anonymous

10/20/25 @ 3:28 PM
No anticoagulant rodenticides should be allowed, except during a declared public health or environmental emergency (current law).

No rollback of AB 1788, AB 2552, or AB 1322 is acceptable. California must invest in ecological rodent control to prote...↓
No attachments

Comment From: Jennifer Koga

10/20/25 @ 3:23 PM
Attachments:

Comment From: Jeannine Angell

10/20/25 @ 3:16 PM
No anticoagulant rodenticides should be allowed. These kill wildlife and pets
No attachments

Comment From: Wendy McKeown

10/20/25 @ 3:12 PM
No anticoagulant rodenticides should be allowed, except during a declared public health or environmental emergency (current law). No rollback of AB 1788, AB 2552, or AB 1322 is acceptable, and California must invest in ecological rodent control to pr...↓
No attachments

Comment From: Gail Richardson

10/20/25 @ 3:10 PM
No anticoagulant rodenticides should be allowed, except during a declared public health or environmental emergency (current law).
No rollback of AB 1788, AB 2552, or AB 1322 is acceptable.
California must invest in ecological rodent control to protec...↓
No attachments

Comment From: Brian Carr

10/20/25 @ 3:07 PM
Please do NOT roll back the prohibitions on anti-coagulant rodenticides. They are non-selective and harm wildlife as well as dogs and cats.
No attachments

Comment From: Marcia Elmer

10/20/25 @ 2:57 PM
I feel that no anticoagulant rodenticides should be allowed, except as the current law stipulates.
No rollback of AB1788, etc. is acceptable.
Anticoagulants are toxic and non-selective and kill the very wildlife that naturally controls rodents.
No attachments

Comment From: Cristina Schryver

10/20/25 @ 2:33 PM
I oppose relaxation of the rules that put unintended wildlife in danger.
No anticoagulant rodenticides should be allowed, except during a declared public health or environmental emergency (current law). No rollback of AB 1788, AB 2552, or AB 1322 is ...↓
No attachments

Comment From: Mary Gill

10/20/25 @ 2:16 PM
Poisons kill not only rats but many other creatures, including animals that control rats! Please protect our environment from these harmful toxins.
No anticoagulant rodenticides should be allowed, except during a declared public health or environment...↓
No attachments

Comment From: Karelle Cornwell

10/20/25 @ 2:08 PM
DPR's proposal undermines AB1788, AB2552 and AB1322 by reopening pathways for routine, widespread poison use, without emergency justification. No anticoagulant rodenticides should be allowed, except during a declared public health or environmental em...↓
No attachments

Comment From: Julie Rose

10/20/25 @ 2:01 PM
• No anticoagulant rodenticides should be allowed, except during a declared public health or environmental emergency (current law),
• No rollback of AB 1788, AB 2552, or AB 1322 is acceptable, and
• California must invest in ecological rodent control...↓
No attachments

Comment From: Monica Cavallaro

10/20/25 @ 1:39 PM
I agree with the Santa Clara Bird Alliance- Protect our birds and other wildlife: anticoagulant rodenticides should not be allowed, except during a declared public health or environmental emergency (current law). No rollback of AB 1788, AB 2552, or ...↓
No attachments

Comment From: Andrew Melnick

10/20/25 @ 1:08 PM
The California Department of Pesticide Regulation (DPR)'s proposal to allow use of anticoagulant rodenticides for any length of time is an extremely regressive change to what previously has been a very creditable and progressive set of regulations ad...↓
No attachments

Comment From: LESLIE LARSON

10/20/25 @ 1:04 PM
No anticoagulant rodenticides should be allowed, except during a declared public health or environmental emergency (current law),
No rollback of AB 1788, AB 2552, or AB 1322 is acceptable, and
California must invest in ecological rodent control to pr...↓
No attachments

Comment From: Emily Renzel

10/20/25 @ 1:03 PM
Dear DPR: Please do not allow any anticoagulant rodenticides unless there is a public health emergency. Those pesticides kill the animals who naturally eat rodents - owls, foxes, cats - wild and domestic, hawks, etc. Anticoagulant pesticides are...↓
No attachments

Comment From: Edwin Aiken

10/20/25 @ 12:57 PM
No anticoagulant rodenticides should be allowed, except during a declared public health or environmental emergency (current law),
No rollback of AB 1788, AB 2552, or AB 1322 is acceptable, and
California must invest in ecological rodent control to pr...↓
No attachments

Comment From: Vaishnavi Anonymous

10/20/25 @ 12:42 PM
I am writing to express my severe disappointment and strong opposition to the DPR's proposal to weaken the limits on anticoagulant rodenticides. The plan to permit these poisons for over 100 days annually is a direct threat to the health of our ecosy...↓
No attachments

Comment From: Barbara Canup

10/20/25 @ 12:41 PM
I am writing to oppose the DPR Anticoagulant Rodenticide Mitigation. The rollback of rules against using these toxic poisons threatens predators, pets, children and the ecosystem. This may well be counterproductive by killing the very predators that ...↓
No attachments

Comment From: David Kiehl

10/20/25 @ 12:38 PM
This would be a danger to all predators and children, not just rats. I urgent plead with you not to rollback restrictions on anticoagulant use in California.
No attachments

Comment From: Max Stoaks

10/20/25 @ 12:29 PM
I understand what a problem rodent infestations can be. However, expanding the use of anticoagulants is not a good way to tackle this problem. There is too much potential for risk to non-targeted life including local fauna such as birds and other mam...↓
No attachments

Comment From: Dwight Agan

10/20/25 @ 12:16 PM
No anticoagulant rodenticides should be allowed, except during a declared public health or environmental emergency (current law),
No rollback of AB 1788, AB 2552, or AB 1322 is acceptable, and
California must invest in ecological rodent control to pr...↓
No attachments

Comment From: Elyse Jankowski

10/18/25 @ 6:46 PM
Please protect our precious California wildlife and ban anticoagulants!
No attachments

Comment From: Kitty Jones

10/18/25 @ 10:30 AM
For the wellbeing of wild animals and the ecosystems we should be protecting all anticoagulants need to be banned. All three bills (AB 1788, AB 2552, and AB 1322) are absolutely critical to protect wildlife from horrible, unnecessary, and agonizing d...↓
No attachments

Comment From: Marie Cerda

10/17/25 @ 11:55 AM
I greatly oppose the proposed mitigations to California's ban on these anticoagulant rodenticides. 35 days/105 days a year is more than enough time for these rodenticides to enter local food webs and cause illness and death in local wildlife. Limitin...↓
No attachments

Comment From: Cara Kuhn

10/17/25 @ 11:55 AM
I support a full ban on poisons in our environment. Aanticoagulant rodenticides kills not only it's intendent target, but it kills other wildlife and people's pets. There are other methods of controlling rats that do not damage our fragile environmen...↓
No attachments

Comment From: Anonymous Anonymous

10/17/25 @ 11:53 AM
Please don't allow use of these toxic substances! Rodents are the bottom of the food chain and poisoning them has a HUGE domino effect on the whole wildlife ecosystem. CA condors were decimated by toxic chemicals and it's taken decades to bring them...↓
No attachments

Comment From: Kolie Swave

10/16/25 @ 8:40 PM
Rodenticide is never the answer. Increasing wildlife predator habitat has a much stronger effect on rodent mitigation in natural areas. Snap traps are more than efficient and are reusable in urban or domestic areas. The risk of a pet ingesting rodent...↓
No attachments

Comment From: Liam M

10/15/25 @ 1:48 PM
The proposed mitigations on restrictions of anticoagulant rodenticides are unacceptable. California ABs 1788, 2552, and 1322 are clear in their protections for native wildlife. The deadly unintended consequences of these poisons are well-documented a...↓
No attachments

Comment From: Deborah Crooks

10/15/25 @ 10:19 AM
All anticoagulants should be banned in California, with no exceptions, other than for a public health or environmental emergency (which is the current law).
There should be no backsliding on the three bills passed into law since 2020: AB 1788, AB 25...↓
No attachments

Comment From: Margot Bezrutczyk

10/15/25 @ 9:53 AM
To the Department of Pesticide Regulation,

I'm distressed to read that you are considering a measure that would allow anticoagulant pesticide use for 100 days each year- this would represent backsliding from the 2020 bills that were passed into law ...↓
No attachments

Comment From: Anonymous Anonymous

10/15/25 @ 9:32 AM
(!) Super-toxic rat poisons indiscriminately harm other species (like owls, bobcats, hawks) that naturally help keep rodent populations down. The harmful effects on wildlife that eat poisoned rats and mice have been well documented in CA. The poisons...↓
No attachments

Comment From: Shani Kleinhaus

10/15/25 @ 9:04 AM
As a Californian and a very concerned citizen, I urge the DPR to reject any effort to roll back existing protections for our wildlife. Specifically, there can be no rollback of AB 1788, AB 2552, or AB 1322.

I am asking you to allow no anticoagulant...↓
No attachments

Comment From: allison fluty

10/15/25 @ 8:55 AM
Allowing anticoagulant rat poison to be available in the environment for any amount of time is absolutely unnecessary and extremely irresponsible. The harm it does to wildlife and the horrible way it kills the intended victims is cruel and barbaric. ...↓
No attachments

Comment From: Jessica Wiggin

10/14/25 @ 11:22 PM
Without exceptions, all anticoagulants should be banned in California. Do not allow the three bills passed into law since 2020 to backslide. AB 1788, AB 2552, and AB 1322 are crucial to protecting all wildlife from these horrific poisons.
No attachments

Comment From: Danielle Jenkins

10/14/25 @ 10:53 PM
All anticoagulant rodenticides should be banned in California except for emergencies, which is already the law. Please don't not change this as it is causing harm to wildlife and our ecosystem.
No attachments

Comment From: Beth L.

10/06/25 @ 1:54 PM
I'm appalled that DPR, which is specifically tasked by law and mission to protect, is proposing to backpedal on crucial rodenticide regulations and protections, per the public workshop of September 24, 2025. All anticoagulants should be banned in Cal...↓
No attachments

Comment From: Terry Davis

10/01/25 @ 8:52 AM
With DPR "required training," this parallels the training component of the Healthy Schools Act (HSA). I would like to see DPR (UC ANR) provide the training, as well as approved courses offered by qualified others. This training must have SPCB/CDPR a...↓
No attachments

Comment From: Cameron Ball

10/01/25 @ 6:22 AM
Re: Public Comment on Draft Proposed Anticoagulant Rodenticide Regulations

To the Director and Staff of the Department of Pesticide Regulation,

I am writing to comment on the draft proposed regulations for anticoagulant rodenticides (ARs). I suppor...↓
No attachments

Comment From: Joel Schulman

9/27/25 @ 1:04 PM
We, Poison Free Malibu, are concerned about the new venues proposed to be opened up for anticoagulant application.
See for reference the one-page DPR workshop document CROSSWALK OF ANTICOAGULANT LEGISLATION AND PROPOSED REGULATIONS (lower table, Proh...↓
No attachments

Comment From: Kian Schulman

9/27/25 @ 12:53 PM

I am Kian Schulman, Director of Poison Free Malibu (PoisonFreeMalibu.org).

Eliminating the anticoagulants is a great cause spearheaded by California.

However, we have been carefully monitoring the reactions of the pest control service companies an...↓
No attachments

Comment From: Tyler Johnson

9/24/25 @ 1:02 PM
I read the 2025 DPR draft on the restriction of anticoagulant rodenticides (ARs) in California. I also attended the workshop (ZOOM) and was a verbal participant. Overall, you guys are decreasing restrictions from current law. Current law has AB1788, ...↓
No attachments

Comment From: Emma Tribble

9/24/25 @ 11:23 AM
Hello,

I'm glad to see that there is an exemption for research uses of anticoagulant rodenticides. I was also wondering if the authorization for research mentioned in the future 3 CCR 6471(d)(7) is meant to be the same kind of research authorization...↓
No attachments

[ Previous Page / Next Page ]