PPC123 | RESEARCH
Fergal Flynn, PPM Services, spoke at PestEx on behalf of BPCA’s Academic Relations Working Group. Fergal looks at what the 2025 Future of Pest Management survey tells us about resistance, trapping, rodenticides, regulation and where the sector might be heading next.
View the charts
We first ran the BPCA Future of Pest Management survey in 2023. We ran it again in 2025, over a few weeks in October and November, and this article gives you a bit of a dive into what has changed, what has stayed the same, and what might need a closer look next time.
I’m part of BPCA’s Academic Relations Working Group. It was originally Paul Westgate’s initiative, and has grown into a really interesting group of BPCA members, lecturers and academics. We’re meant to talk about surveys, studies and research links with universities, although quite often we end up talking about random pest control things. Very interesting meetings, if that’s your sort of thing.
In 2025, we had 473 respondents, compared with 816 in 2023. Fewer people, but still enough to draw useful conclusions. We covered trapping, monitoring, glue boards, rodenticide use, regulation, licensing, behavioural resistance and physiological resistance.
Who answered?
It’s worth starting with who actually filled in the survey, as it affects how we interpret the data.
Most respondents were owners, senior managers or pest control technicians. We also saw a lot of experience in the results. Around 41% had more than 20 years in the industry, and 26.4% had 11 to 20 years. That fits with what we already know about the sector: a lot of knowledge sits with people who have been doing this for a long time.
Qualifications were strong. In 2025, 98% of respondents held formal pest control qualifications, up from 97% in 2023. RSPH Level 2 AiPM or the BPC Diploma remains the standard qualification.
We also saw 17% holding advanced qualifications, up from 14% in 2023. Company size is important too. Sole traders were the largest single group, rising from 26% in 2023 to 30% in 2025.
So, when we look at this data, we need to remember that it is strongly shaped by smaller businesses. That’s not a problem, because smaller businesses make up a huge part of the sector, but it is worth keeping in mind.
Where the work is
Residential work accounted for about a third of jobs, at 32.4%. Commercial and industrial work made up 18.5%, and food services 16%. Then you’ve got agriculture, education, retail, short-term accommodation, healthcare and entertainment making up the rest.
That probably won’t surprise many people. Most of us know that residential, commercial and food work are a big chunk of the day-to-day industry.
What is interesting is the split between routine work and active infestations.
Across the survey, 48% of work was routine monitoring or maintenance. Another 41% involved active infestations requiring treatment, and 17% were emergency responses.
That tells an important story. Pest management is not just turning up when something has gone badly wrong. Almost half the work captured here is routine monitoring or maintenance. In other words, prevention at scale.
Delays cost money and create risk
We asked pest professionals what happens when clients delay intervention or try to go down their own route.
In a commercial setting, a pest issue can very quickly become a business issue. What happens if it ends up on Facebook? What happens if word gets around? What happens if a problem that could have been nipped in the bud turns into something that needs closure, extra visits or a much bigger intervention?
The sectors where respondents were most likely to report escalation after delayed response were residential, at 72.7%, and food services, at 70.9%. That also lines up with what we see in practice. In housing, you may have housing officers involved. In food premises, you may have environmental health officers. There are clearer enforcement routes, and problems can become formal quite quickly.
Overall, the message is simple: pest professionals see the value of early intervention. The sooner we are involved, the better the outcome is likely to be.
"Recording whether you’re catching juveniles or adults can tell you more about the population you’re dealing with. It can also help separate your reporting from someone who just writes “two mice caught”.
Trapping and monitoring
The trapping data was very similar to 2023.
In 2025, 60% of respondents used traps for monitoring, either internally, externally or both. But only 58% routinely baited traps with some form of lure. So, more than four in ten people using traps were not routinely using a lure.
That’s a useful point for technicians to reflect on. If you’re putting traps into boxes with no lure, are you giving yourself the best chance?
The positive news is that 78% routinely changed lure or bait during deployment, 86% used traps in tunnels or stations, and 89% recorded numbers caught. Only 40% recorded approximate age, such as juvenile or adult.
That’s one of those small things that can add value to reporting. Recording whether you’re catching juveniles or adults can tell you more about the population you’re dealing with. It can also help separate your reporting from someone who just writes “two mice caught”.
Trap avoidance remains an issue. In 2025, 115% said they experienced trap avoidance often, up from 11.5% in 2023.
Now, we need to be cautious. Different people answered each survey, so we should not overclaim. But we can say trap avoidance is definitely something pest professionals are seeing.
The top cited causes were neophobia, alternative food sources, prior DIY trapping attempts and plastic box avoidance.
When people try to improve trap success, they are mainly using boxes, tunnels, alternative baits, repositioning traps and leaving traps unset briefly. Those are practical, grounded responses, and they show technicians adapting to what they see on site.
Resistance is not just one thing
Resistance was one of the most interesting parts of the survey.
In 2025, 82% said they had encountered some form of resistance, up from 77% in 2023. Also, 49% correctly described resistance as all forms of rodent non-engagement, up from 44%.
That matters because resistance is not just physiological resistance. It can be behavioural too. It can be reluctance to engage with bait boxes, reluctance to take baits in boxes, or reluctance to engage with traps.
Behavioural resistance was the most commonly encountered type, reported by 62%. Of those, 559% had experienced it in both rats and mice. The top behaviours were reluctance to engage with bait boxes, at 72%, reluctance to engage with baits in boxes, at 61% , and reluctance to engage with traps, also at 61% .
Physiological or metabolic resistance was reported by 43%. Most respondents were aware of resistance status checks, including tail sampling. The top responses to physiological resistance were swapping active ingredient, switching to physical control and escalating active ingredient.
What professionals do when encountering resistance
One interesting point is that 25% said they swap formulation base when dealing with physiological resistance. That might help palatability, but it does not necessarily deal with physiological resistance. If the active ingredient is the same, changing from pasta to grain does not change the resistance issue. That suggests there is still some education to do.
Rodenticide use is changing
Block bait remains the most commonly used formulation, with 67% using it often or always. Wheat bait and pasta bait follow. Liquid bait is rarely used.
The survey also showed a useful split between internal and external second-generation anticoagulant rodenticide use.
Brodifacoum dominated internally, ranked number one by 41%. Bromadiolone led externally, ranked number one by 32%.
That is good to see; it suggests many pest professionals are matching products to risk. The more persistent, more bioaccumulative products are being used more cautiously.
Anticoagulants are still the main go-to product. In 2025, 66% ranked them as the most palatable and effective. But cholecalciferol is growing. It rose from 22% ranked number one in 2023 to 26% in 2025, and usage often or always rose from 28% to 38%.
That feels like a real shift. It may reflect changes to SGAR labels, regulatory pressure and technicians looking for different tools.
Protecting the toolkit
We asked what would happen if anticoagulant rodenticides were removed or restricted. The responses were strong.
Respondents said speed of control would be worse, at 86%, effectiveness of work worse, at 83%, rodent-borne diseases worse, at 79%, and food safety worse, at 77%. If SGARs were banned externally, 86% predicted decreased rat control, with 74% predicting a significant decrease.
This is important data. Pest professionals are saying that losing tools would affect speed, effectiveness, public health and food safety. That matters when regulators or agencies suggest alternatives can simply replace rodenticides.
People also reported that the open areas rule change is already being felt.
Has the change in rules about using SGARs in open areas negatively affected public health?
In 2025, 61% said it had some or massive negative effect on public health, although this was lower than the 77.5% who predicted an effect in 2023. That is still not a small number.
Technology is growing, but slowly
Non-toxic monitoring bait remains common, used often or always by 63%. Tracking dusts and gels were at 37%. Wildlife cameras were at 24%, and PIR or movement sensors at 15% .
We are seeing more technology on the market, and walking around PestEx you could see plenty of it. Personally, if I’m dealing with a complicated rodent issue, having a camera in a loft can make a real difference. It helps you see where rodents are moving and where to focus your attention. I’d expect this area to keep growing.
The future looks harder
In 2025, 88% of respondents said rodent control will be harder in five years’ time. That is almost unchanged from 2023. At the same time, there is strong support for regulation.
In 2025, 88% supported licensing for pest professionals, 86% supported heavier rodenticide regulation, and 62% supported approved regulated traps only.
There was also 98% support for banning unqualified buyers, 93% support for tighter restrictions on sellers, and 84% support for mandatory CPD.
That tells me pest professionals see the value in what they do. They want the toolkit protected, but they also want the industry to be professional, competent and properly recognised.
The survey is not perfect, and there is more to unpack, including insects and better segmentation by location, company type and demographics.
The message is clear: pest professionals prevent financial loss, protect public health and manage problems early. Resistance is becoming more visible.Cholecalciferol use is rising, technology is growing, and rodent control is expected to get harder. There is strong support for licensing and tighter control over who can buy and sell professional products. We need to keep building the evidence.
TAKE RESEARCH SERIOUSLY AND WANT TO GET INVOLVED?
BPCA’s Academic Relations Working Group is at the forefront of protecting your toolkit and supporting our evidence-based policy work. Want to join in? hello@bpca.org.uk