About TAG

The Termite Action Group, known by the acronym TAG, was initially formed in 1999 as a community action group in response to termite problems being experienced by Homeowners in Brisbane, Australia.

The suburb of Forest Lake was particularly prominent in having these problems due to factors such as zero allotments, poor construction methodology and covenants in regard to trees, shrubs and gardens that encouraged termite activity. It was also discovered from many and varied discussions that a major preconstruction pest management company, which provided treatments for many major project home builders, was not providing chemical barrier treatments in compliance with the applicable Standard. Several well attended community meetings were held that demonstrated the length and breadth of the problem being experienced by the wider community.

The group co-ordinator of TAG, Mr. Andrew M. Campbell, took on the project of identifying the problems that beset the pest management industry and the building industry. This involved the task of travelling throughout Australia and identifying problems experienced in each state and territory, to evaluate systems and products used in pest management and relating this to the various differing building methodologies used in the construction of homes. The inter-relationship between building systems and pest management appeared to be an extremely random process with inadequate forethought given to an integrated approach to the problem.

Throughout Australia, there emerged problems with the use of chemical treatments for differing reasons such as underspraying, overdosing sites, and a preconstruction market with little or no checks and balances on the use of chemical. Builders were able to pay minimal prices to get a certificate that falsely stated that a chemical barrier had been installed in accordance with the Australian Standard. This generally resulted in homes having little or no protection against termites. As a result of these illicit practises, people lost confidence in chemical barrier systems. The problem was that only chemicals killed termites!

There was a massive upsurge in the introduction of physical termite management systems that included graded stone, metal sheet, plastics and glass that were integrated into the internal perimeter cavity of ‘slab on ground’ design homes. Often these products and systems were poorly researched and the benefits overstated by system providers. Physical termite management systems were limited in that no warranty was provided for bridging of these systems. Homeowners were unaware or unsure of their requirements and subscribed to a ‘set and forget’ regime.

The differing construction types, external works on a home and differing termite species types and habits provided a plethora of problems for builders, pest managers and homeowners. TAG was constantly approached for advice on what should be done when people had homes being constructed, had purchased pre-existing homes or required pre-purchase inspections. Many queries were fielded by TAG in relation to what pest manager or company they would be able to trust to do a proper treatment.

Homeowners approached TAG in relation to termite infestations with some houses being condemned after termite activity rendered a home both unsafe and uninhabitable. Problems that emanated from these occurrences were generally related to finances because insurances almost invariably did not apply to termite damage. This would lead to frustration amongst Homeowners in not being able to address the problem, and often the breakdown of a relationship or marriage. People would sometimes just walk away from their home and go bankrupt, leaving the home with the mortgagor or bank.

The Australian Environmental Pest Managers’ Association (AEPMA), which is the officially recognised industry association for Pest Managers, commissioned TAG to undertake a review of termite management systems and products. TAG discovered that the process of testing and certifying many of the systems and products in common usage was poorly administered and that the trial data was either insufficient, deficient or had little or no relativity in determining the efficacy of products and systems on the market. The APVMA, ABCB, CSIRO and the ABSAC all bore responsibility in these areas.

Further problems evolved in relation to the poorly written and researched Australian Standard (AS 3660 Series) relating to termites and buildings. The Standard urgently requires revision, if only to curtail the misuse of chemical applications in overdosing sites and poisoning workers. The CSIRO and ABSAC, who did much of the testing and assessing of systems and products, often relied on data provided by the manufacturers of the systems and products and scant regard was paid to practical applications and time trial data in the rush to get these novel products to the market.

The APVMA who provided chemical registrations was also responsible for problems that ensued with the ill-fated “User Agreement Returns System” and the introduction of inferior generic termiticides. The ABCB, which in conjunction with the Building Codes Administration from each state and territory was responsible for the Building code of Australia, also had complicity in the problem. Variations to the Building Code by state and/or territory bureaucracies conspired to provide more headaches for Homeowners.

In an environment where federal, state and local government instrumentalities and bureaucracies interact with privatised areas such as Australian Standards and manufacturers and suppliers of termite management systems, the needs of the Homeowner become a very secondary concern. Consumer groups involved in decision making processes were generally under-represented, and where representation occurred, were often under-educated and therefore unable to fathom or identify the many variables, commercial or otherwise, that were involved in the process. The resultant decisions often inadvertently conspired to provide Homeowners with a home that was designed, in plain speaking terms, to become ‘packaged termite food’.

TAG has been represented at many various ‘Termite Working Parties’ and has interacted with the ABCB and Building Codes Authorities in states and territories, Australian Standards, the APVMA, the ACCC in various states, and the CSIRO and ABSAC, in representing the Homeowners’ plight in relation to termite issues. TAG has presented at national forums for the AEMPA and the AIBS (Australian Institute of Building Surveyors) on termite problems and has consulted widely to ascertain what can be done to provide Homeowners with some certainty in relation to keeping their homes free from the ravages of termites.

Pest management in the last fifteen years has become an exacting science that requires pest managers to be constantly updating their skills and learning in relation to buildings and termites. Modern gadgetry such as thermal imaging cameras, borescopes and sonar detection devices are part of the arsenal of weaponry employed by pest managers against termites. TAG identified the vastly differing skills level of many operators involved in the pest management industry which has created problems for homeowners.

TAG has now correlated all of this information so as to educate and assist homeowners in best defending their homes against the ravages of termites. TAG seeks to provide intending homeowners with clear and unequivocal guidelines on how to address termite issues with both builders and real estate agents. TAG is also committed to assisting homeowners in obtaining the services of properly insured, licensed and qualified pest managers throughout Australia who are committed to proper and ethical pest management.

TAG now provides membership for homeowners and intending homeowners to share in a wealth of resource and information that will best educate the Homeowner on adopting termite management systems and products to provide some certainty in the defence of their home against termites.