Exploring drivers of the usage of anticoagulant rodenticides on UK farms
2018
Tomlinson, Alexandra J. | Rayner, Annie | Bright, Ashleigh | Cowan, D. P. (David P.) | Littin, Kate E. | Layton, Ruth
Anticoagulant rodenticides (ARs) are considered inhumane, show increasingly limited efficacy due to acquired resistance, and carry environmental consequences associated with non-target species uptake. In a questionnaire study of 499 UK farms that all deployed chemical rodenticide we found a high mean reliance (79%), on second generation ARs with just over half of the respondents using no other rodent control methods. Additional methods where deployed, alone or in combination, included predation (41%), kill-trap deployment (16%) and shooting (1%). Nearly 40% of all respondents deployed rodenticides year-round. There was no evidence to suggest that “tidy-farm” measures, such as clearing food spills and minimising on-farm rodent harbourage sites aimed at minimising rodent-associated problems, were associated with a lower likelihood of year-round deployment; in fact trends in our analyses suggested the opposite. We therefore encourage operators to fully evaluate the true necessity of rodenticide deployment before AR use.
Показать больше [+] Меньше [-]Ключевые слова АГРОВОК
Библиографическая информация
Эту запись предоставил National Agricultural Library