Health department must approve rat extermination plan
With complaints from the state Game Commission and bald eagle watchers on the use of poison to exterminate rats near the eagle nest in Pittsburgh, the Allegheny County Health Department will need to first approve a “safe” extermination plan, according to Guillermo Cole, health department spokesman.
GGMJS LLC, which bought a bankrupt and rat-infested recycling center in the Hazelwood section of Pittsburgh less than one air-mile from a bald eagle nest, will need to produce an extermination plan that is effective, environmentally safe and not harmful to humans and animals, according to Cole.
The cleanup of the site cannot begin until the county approves the extermination plan.
“We will balance all of the concerns and take the best approach to address the health and safety concerns of all stakeholders,” wrote Kirk Burkley, an attorney representing GGMJS.
Eagle watchers who fear that an eagle could die from eating a poisoned rat have mounted a public campaign, including a petition on the website www.change.org, to stop the use of poison at the recycling site.
Mary Ann Thomas is a staff wither with Trib Total Media. She can be reached at firstname.lastname@example.org or 724-226-4691.
More Valley News Dispatch
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments â either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.