Memmott Kristin, Murray Maureen, Rutberg Allen
Center for Animals and Public Policy, Cummings School of Veterinary Medicine at Tufts University, 200 Westboro Rd, North Grafton, MA, 01536, USA.
Department of Infectious Disease and Global Health, Wildlife Clinic, Cummings School of Veterinary Medicine at Tufts University, 200 Westboro Rd, North Grafton, MA, 01536, USA.
Ecotoxicology. 2017 Jan;26(1):90-96. doi: 10.1007/s10646-016-1744-5. Epub 2016 Dec 8.
Secondary exposure to chemical rodenticides, specifically second-generation anticoagulant rodenticides (SGARs), poses a threat to non-target wildlife including birds of prey. Federal regulations in the United States currently limit homeowner access to SGARs as a way of minimizing this threat. With legal access to SGARs, pest management professionals (PMPs) represent a potential linkage to non-target exposure. There is limited research focused on rodent control practices, chemical rodenticide preferences, level of concern and awareness, or opinions on rodenticide regulations as they relate to PMPs. An online survey was sent to PMP companies across Massachusetts, USA, between October and November 2015. Thirty-five responses were obtained, a 20 % response rate. The preferred rodent control method among responding PMP companies was chemical rodenticides, specifically the SGAR bromadiolone. Respondents varied in their level of concern regarding the impact of chemical rodenticides on non-target species and showed a low level of awareness regarding SGAR potency and half-life. All responding companies reported using integrated pest management (IPM) strategies, with nearly all utilizing chemical rodenticides at some point. Enhanced education focused on SGAR potency, bioaccumulation potential, exposure routes, and negative impacts on non-target wildlife may improve efforts made by PMPs to minimize risk to wildlife and decrease dependence on chemical rodenticide use. Future studies evaluating use of anticoagulant rodenticide (ARs) by PMPs and the association with AR residues found in non-target wildlife is necessary to determine if current EPA regulations need to be modified to effectively reduce the risk of SGARs to non-target wildlife.
二次接触化学灭鼠剂,特别是二代抗凝血灭鼠剂(SGARs),对包括猛禽在内的非目标野生动物构成威胁。美国的联邦法规目前限制房主获取SGARs,以此将这种威胁降至最低。由于能够合法获取SGARs,害虫防治专业人员(PMPs)成为非目标接触的一个潜在关联因素。针对与PMPs相关的灭鼠控制措施、化学灭鼠剂偏好、关注程度和认知水平,或对灭鼠剂法规的看法,相关研究有限。2015年10月至11月期间,向美国马萨诸塞州的PMP公司发送了一份在线调查问卷。共获得35份回复,回复率为20%。回复的PMP公司中首选的灭鼠控制方法是化学灭鼠剂,特别是SGAR溴敌隆。受访者对化学灭鼠剂对非目标物种影响的关注程度各不相同,对SGAR的效力和半衰期的认知水平较低。所有回复的公司都报告采用了综合虫害管理(IPM)策略,几乎所有公司在某些时候都使用化学灭鼠剂。针对SGAR的效力、生物累积潜力、接触途径以及对非目标野生动物的负面影响开展强化教育,可能会改善PMPs为将对野生动物的风险降至最低并减少对化学灭鼠剂使用的依赖所做的努力。未来有必要开展研究,评估PMPs对抗凝血灭鼠剂(ARs)的使用情况以及与在非目标野生动物中发现的AR残留的关联,以确定美国环境保护局(EPA)目前的法规是否需要修改,以有效降低SGARs对非目标野生动物的风险。