Primary non-target hazard assessment can be separated into two basic components: bait acceptance and toxicity. This bait acceptance study investigates the potential primary non-target hazard (direct consumption of bait pellets) that the broadcast application of rodenticide bait may pose to non-native feral cats and mongooses. The study was conducted in 4 different forest habitats in Hawaii using 2 different commercial formulations of placebo bait pellets. We documented vertebrates that came to placebo bait pellets at bait monitoring stations to assess bait acceptance. Bait pellets were monitored at each site using 40 infrared (IR) monitors/data loggers and weatherproof automatic cameras. During the 80 days of the study, cameras operated for 76,800 hours and recorded 21,211 slides of vertebrates at bait stations. Rodents, the target species, were the largest group, documented at stations in 98.98% (n = 20,994) of these photographs. Feral cats were detected in 0.09% (n = 20) and mongooses in 0.46% (n = 97) of the slides of vertebrates at bait pellets. The 117 photos of feral cats and mongooses represent 44 occasions where these predators encountered bait pellets; in 14 of these the bait was eaten. These data suggest that the primary hazard to non-native feral cats and mongooses from the broadcast application of pelletized rodenticides is very low. Thus, this study should support the effort to obtain regulatory approval for the broadcast application of rodenticide bait for conservation purposes in the state of Hawaii.
Island. The limits of detection for diphacinone were 0.4 nanograms per milliliter (parts per billion) seawater, 15 nanograms per gram (dry weight) soil, 20 nanograms per gram (parts per billion) fish fillet, 13 nanograms per gram whole crab, and 34 nanograms per gram soft tissue limpet.
One of the goals of this Symposium was to bring together agricultural and conservation users of rodenticides to discuss the impacts of rodenticides on the environment, examine the current regulatory climate governing their use, and identify ways that users can reduce or eliminate these impacts. Some of the presentations in today's symposium highlighted specific impacts, and the preceding talk described the scenario of what can happen if an issue related to pesticide impacts ends up in the courts. The three agencies that were represented on this panel (USDA, USFWS, and EPA) have regulatory oversight and enforcement authority for the use of rodenticides and/or the adverse effects resulting from the use of rodenticides. In addition, USDA and FWS are the primary federal users of rodenticides for agriculture and conservation. USDA holds the registrations for a number of rodenticide products for agricultural and conservation purposes. Panelists were asked to describe how Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA), Endangered Species Act (ESA), National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), the Animal Damage Control Act, and the administration of USDA's pesticide labels apply to rodenticide adverse effects. Panelists were then asked to bring up an issue within the scope of their agency that they view as problematic for conducting eradication projects. Panelists were also asked to suggest proactive measures that the rodent eradication community can undertake to improve future rodent eradication efforts. Finally, the floor was opened to audience members for questions and comments.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.