Literature DB >> 21272991

User behaviour, best practice and the risks of non-target exposure associated with anticoagulant rodenticide use.

David G Tosh1, Richard F Shore, Stephen Jess, Alan Withers, Stuart Bearhop, W Ian Montgomery, Robbie A McDonald.   

Abstract

Usage of anticoagulant rodenticides (ARs) is an integral component of modern agriculture and is essential for the control of commensal rodent populations. However, the extensive deployment of ARs has led to widespread exposure of a range of non-target predatory birds and mammals to some compounds, in particular the second-generation anticoagulant rodenticides (SGARs). As a result, there has been considerable effort placed into devising voluntary best practice guidelines that increase the efficacy of rodent control and reduce the risk of non-target exposure. Currently, there is limited published information on actual practice amongst users or implementation of best practice. We assessed the behaviour of a typical group of users using an on-farm questionnaire survey. Most baited for rodents every year using SGARs. Most respondents were apparently aware of the risks of non-target exposure and adhered to some of the best practice recommendations but total compliance was rare. Our questionnaire revealed that users of first generation anticoagulant rodenticides rarely protected or checked bait stations, and so took little effort to prevent primary exposure of non-targets. Users almost never searched for and removed poisoned carcasses and many baited for prolonged periods or permanently. These factors are all likely to enhance the likelihood of primary and secondary exposure of non-target species.
Copyright © 2010. Published by Elsevier Ltd.

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21272991     DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2010.12.014

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Environ Manage        ISSN: 0301-4797            Impact factor:   6.789


  6 in total

1.  Rodenticide exposure in wood mouse and house mouse populations on farms and potential secondary risk to predators.

Authors:  David G Tosh; Robbie A McDonald; Stuart Bearhop; Neville R Llewellyn; W Ian Montgomery; Richard F Shore
Journal:  Ecotoxicology       Date:  2012-03-24       Impact factor: 2.823

2.  Use of anticoagulant rodenticides by pest management professionals in Massachusetts, USA.

Authors:  Kristin Memmott; Maureen Murray; Allen Rutberg
Journal:  Ecotoxicology       Date:  2016-12-08       Impact factor: 2.823

3.  Monitoring agricultural rodenticide use and secondary exposure of raptors in Scotland.

Authors:  J Hughes; E Sharp; M J Taylor; L Melton; G Hartley
Journal:  Ecotoxicology       Date:  2013-04-18       Impact factor: 2.823

4.  Anticoagulant rodenticides on our public and community lands: spatial distribution of exposure and poisoning of a rare forest carnivore.

Authors:  Mourad W Gabriel; Leslie W Woods; Robert Poppenga; Rick A Sweitzer; Craig Thompson; Sean M Matthews; J Mark Higley; Stefan M Keller; Kathryn Purcell; Reginald H Barrett; Greta M Wengert; Benjamin N Sacks; Deana L Clifford
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2012-07-13       Impact factor: 3.240

5.  Impact of Rodenticides on the Coagulation Properties of Milk.

Authors:  Salam A Ibrahim; Tom Tse
Journal:  Foods       Date:  2018-04-07

6.  Start-up financing of professional pest control in pig farming in North Rhine-Westphalia in Germany.

Authors:  Odile C Hecker; Marc Boelhauve; Marcus Mergenthaler
Journal:  Porcine Health Manag       Date:  2018-10-01
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.