Rat proofing the city is a responsibility of the city government. The greatest force that can be exerted to-day toward the permanent suppression of the rat pest is through the passage of practical building ordinances that require the rat proofing of buildings and the adoption of sanitary regulations that will insure clean premises and adequate collection and disposed of garbage. It has been demonstrated that such requirements not only are effective in reducing the numbers of rats to the minimum, but also that they greatly improve health conditions, reduce the fire hazard, and from a purely economic standpoint are profitable. In one city in which rat proofing has been vigorously prosecuted for a number of years and in which more than 80 per cent of the old buildings have been made proof against rats, the sharp decline in the number of fires resulted in a 5 per cent reduction in the fire-insurance rates. More than $1,000,000 was spent in the same city in rat proofing 10 miles of docks, but even this large expenditure was found to be a profitable investment.
Probably nothing so nearly reflects the sanitary conditions of a city as the number of rats that it harbors, for the rat population is usually in inverse ratio to the degree of sanitation maintained. In 1930 at least 13 cities in this country had rat-proofing laws, and more than 30 others had fire-stopping requirements that are important in rat proofing.
An effective rat-proofing program must be practicable and not too drastic; otherwise it will fail from lack of popular support. Attempts to enforce rat proofing of existing structures would probably not be feasible unless under stress of an outbreak of bubonic plague or other rat-borne disease epidemic. There seems to be no good reason, however, why buildings constructed in the future or remodeled should not be made rat proof under the requirements of building ordinances. Had such ordinances been enacted 50 years ago and rigidly enforced since that time the large majority of buildings to-day would be rat proof, and rats, with their accompanying filth and destructiveness, would have been largely eliminated. There would also be fewer of the unsightly and insanitary shacks now existing in most cities, and the average structure would be of a more desirable type. As modern construction conforms so closely in principle to the requirements of rat proofing, there should be little, if any, opposition among builders to a rat-proofing clause in building ordinances.
In considering the suppression of rats, at the outset city authorities should discard all methods other than those that strike at the source of the trouble. The actual destruction of rats is necessary as a temporary means of stopping their depredations, but modern construction and sanitation are the weapons that must be relied upon to gain permanent relief. In addition to a rat-proofing ordinance, every city should have a law requiring that all garbage wherever accumulated be kept in rat-proof containers or garbage cans until collected or until destroyed by incineration or otherwise disposed of in a manner that would avoid the possibility of its providing food for rats. Containers should have covers not easily removed by dogs and other animals. The city should also enact regulations prohibiting the accumulation of trash, refuse, or waste matter of any kind on either public or private premises, and should provide adequate means for collecting and disposing of all waste.
Consideration should also be given to the sewer system. Although most modern sewers do not offer opportunity for the unrestricted breeding of rats, there are many still in use that furnish harbors for large numbers of these pests in sections of some cities. Of most importance is the corner catch basin, storm sewer, or street-drainage opening, which should be effectively remodeled, if necessary, to provide smooth interior vertical walls with a drop of at least 3 feet; rats are unable to jump 3 feet vertically or to climb smooth surfaces.
Another place that should receive attention is the city dumping ground, which frequently serves as an incubator for rats, and these soon overflow into near-by sections of the city. A study should be made of methods of disposing of waste materials and a system put into effect that will meet the requirements of the city and insure the destruction, removal, or adequate covering of all such food for rats. Any other conditions that may be found favorable for the breeding of rats, whether on public or on private property, should be declared a public nuisance and ordered corrected.
The samples or models of rat-proofing and garbage-removal ordinances here given were prepared by the United States Public Health Service as a result of its experience in combating bubonic plague in several coastal cities. They have, in substance, been adopted and put into practice by a number of cities and have been found practicable. They should be applicable to any city after necessary allowance and possible changes have been made to conform to local conditions and constitutional considerations.
AN ORDINANCE DEFINING RAT PROOFING OF ALL BUILDINGS[3]