Two chemicals banned for being too toxic to wildlife but approved for use in pet medicines are polluting England’s rivers, an investigation has found.
Permethrin and imidacloprid, used to kill parasites such as fleas and ticks on cats and dogs, were banned in Europe in 2002 and 2018 respectively because of their danger to aquatic life and pollinators.
Along with fipronil, another insecticide found in 483 pet products, at least one of these chemicals was found in 109 of 283 river sites tested by the Environment Agency (EA) at levels above accepted safe limits for wildlife.
Analyzing the EA’s data, the Wildlife and Countryside Link (WCL) found fipronil in 105 sites – 37% of the total tested – even though it has never been used in UK agriculture, with some sites showing concentrations 100 times above safe levels and two more than 1,000 times.
Imidacloprid was found at 22 sites, half of which had concentrations above safe levels, while permethrin was found at four sites, all of which had concentrations between three and seven times safe levels.
Recent studies from the UK, Spain and the USA have identified veterinary medicines as a likely source of fipronil and other insecticides in the aquatic environment.
They have suggested a number of ways in which these chemicals can enter rivers, such as through the washing of treated pets and their bedding or clothing, urine or feces, or through treated dogs swimming in rivers.
Richard Benwell, Chief Executive of the WCL, said: “Giving pets the highest standard of care need not come at the expense of nature, but these findings suggest that too many insecticides and other toxic chemicals are still ending up in our rivers.
“The government could show real leadership by banning these harmful substances to help vets and pet lovers switch to the less polluting alternatives that are clearly available.”
According to a 2021 survey by the British Veterinary Association, 98% of vets who treat dogs and cats said they were concerned about the environmental impact of chemicals used in pet medicines.
Andre Menache, veterinary surgeon and director of the Progressive Vets Association (PVA), said: “We have known about the environmental impact of parasiticides for many years.
“We need to go beyond the plethora of voluntary guidelines that exist if we are to reverse the decline in wildlife. That is why PVA supports the call for a ban on these chemicals.”
Along with environmental groups including Pesticide Action Network (PAN UK), Greenpeace, the RSPB, The Rivers Trust and Wildfish, the PVA is calling on the UK government to ban all pesticide substances from veterinary medicines if they are not approved for use in agriculture, and to automatically include any that are banned in the future.
They say there are safer alternatives, so such a ban would not mean that pets would have to go without treatment.
Josie Cohen, of PAN UK, said: “It simply makes no sense to ban these chemicals from being used on crops to protect the environment, while allowing them to be used routinely by millions of pet owners every month.
“If we are going to tackle chemical pollution, we urgently need to close this loophole. Where alternatives exist, which is absolutely the case for veterinary medicines, chemicals known to harm wildlife should be taken off the market.”
A spokesman for the Veterinary Medicines Directorate said: “When we license veterinary medicines, we consider both parasite control and environmental risks. In this case, the medicine plays an important role in treating fleas and ticks, which can cause harmful diseases in pets and pose risks to humans.
“We will continue to take a balanced approach to veterinary medicines and have set up a group of experts to look at how we can best reduce the impact of medicines on the environment.
