Consumer Reports' Look At Pest Control Draws Criticism

I’m sure many of your readers saw the recent article in Consumer Reports: “Safer Ways to Banish Bugs … A Consumer Guide to Pest Control.”

The article repeats what most of us know: IPM is here to stay, “toxic” chemicals are out, and consumers should be extra careful in choosing a professional exterminator to treat their property.

That’s how the author refers to the pest control profession: “exterminator.” I thought we’d been working very hard for years to eliminate that particular image from the consumer’s mind. Even worse, the “For more information” section at the end of the article — with four university mentions out of six listed — makes no reference to the National Pest Control Association or the existence of any state or regional pest control associations. Why weren’t our representatives consulted for the writing of such an article? I’d have thought our own industry professionals would have provided much more input to this sweeping article in such a prestigious publication.

Pokes at our industry by groups looking to do away with professional PCOs, who do in fact guard our environment, offend us all. Clearly the job of improving communications between our industry and the consumer is far from over.

Michael Weisburger
President, B.&D.A. Weisburger, Inc.
White Plains, N.Y.

Editor’s Note: The article, “Safer Ways to Banish Bugs,” appeared in the June 1997 issue of Consumer Reports. For the story, Consumer Reports’ researchers apparently conducted a several-month investigation of the pest control industry, and found, in some cases, consumers “might not be offered the newer methods of pest control,” or IPM, even if they request it. On the other hand, the report noted that with careful questioning and advance research, consumers in most areas should be able to locate companies knowledgeable in IPM.

Send letters to: PCT Letters, 4012 Bridge Ave., Cleveland OH 44113.