Exploring drivers of the usage of anticoagulant rodenticides on UK farms

Abstract

ABSTRACTAnticoagulant 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.