A Perspective on Rat Control

Davis, David E.

doi:10.2307/4588231

Cited by 7 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Experts expressed anecdotal dissatisfaction with the overall effectiveness of municipal management approaches (Sherrard, 1943;Davis, 1952;Margulis, 1977;Davis and Jackson, 1981;Kaukeinen, 1994;Colvin and Jackson, 1999;Lambropoulos et al, 1999;Meyer, 1999Meyer, , 2003Easterbrook et al, 2005;Parsons et al, 2017;Himsworth, 2020). It appeared, based on authors descriptions, that municipal approaches failed to sustainably reduce infestations (i.e., the outcome expectations), not because there was a flaw in the long-held rat-reduction paradigm, but because cities did not adhere to a variety of methodological and attribute expectations.…”

Section: Did They Meet Methodological and Attribute Expectations?mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Corrigan (2006) explained that the many direct causes of infestations arise and persist in, and are connected across numerous sectors of the urban ecosystem. Successful management in such a system is contingent upon taking a 'total environment' approach in which all FWAH causes, anywhere in the urban environment, that might contribute to rat problems are removed (Davis, 1952;Davis and Jackson, 1981). Other aspects of the rat management problem have similarly been broken down into individual causes requiring individual solutions.…”

Section: A Path For the New Change The Methodological And Attribute E...mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For instance, Lantz (1909) described how buildings, structures, and food sources (e.g., waste management plans) could be designed to prevent rats from finding FWAH. Later, Davis (1952) experimentally demonstrated how sanitation procedures (e.g., removing clutter, junk, and garbage) could sustainably reduce rat infestations in several city blocks. Other studies focused on the application of lethal methods, such as rodenticides (Drummond, 1970;Bajomi, 1980;Al-Sanei et al, 1984), introducing a pathogen into the rat population (Jäkel et al, 2019), and traps (Taylor et al, 2008).…”

Section: Reduction Techniquesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…First, authors attributed failures at the municipal level to an absence of political, scientific, public health, municipal, and/or public interest in addressing or understanding rat problems. Davis (1952) concluded that "the simple objective of getting rid of rats is too narrow to merit the attention of health officers" and Colvin and Jackson (1999) reiterated this issue by explaining that persistent low political and scientific interest in rodents in the United States led to disjointed, uncoordinated control programs. This issue appears to be entrenched in the literature with similar statements made by authors from the mid to late 1900s through to recent years (Jackson, 1972;Davis and Jackson, 1981;Richards, 1988;Colvin and Jackson, 1999;Colvin, 2000;Parsons et al, 2017).…”

Section: Why or Why Haven't Municipal Approaches Met Expectations?mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Reconsidering the “War on Rats”: What We Know From Over a Century of Research Into Municipal Rat Management

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To sustainably control urban rat infestations, management efforts need to encompass large areas of urban centers. Therefore, the objective of this review and narrative synthesis was to collate what is known about municipal-scale rat management. We explored the management frameworks that have been used at a large scale in cities and we describe the expectations of experts who have designed and implemented these frameworks. We found that there has been a persistent “war on rats” paradigm driving this literature since the early 1900s. Not only was there little quantitative evidence to support this paradigm and associated methodologies, but together, they failed to meet the expectations of those who designed and implemented them due to real-world constraints (i.e., limited resources). To improve the field of municipal management, we identify two distinct options. First, stakeholders may continue to wage the “war on rats” while improving existing strategies within this paradigm. Key pathways forward include developing evaluation metrics aligned with program objectives, establishing the cost-effectiveness of methodologies, and improving control efficacy. Second, we suggest a new paradigm, one that considers that rat management is a complex system that must be approached by first mapping its complexity to highlight and prioritize the many complex upstream determinants of infestations. This perspective highlights how rat management may be a wicked problem for which there is no overarching solution and instead can only be managed by making incremental gains in individual components of the problem over time. Importantly, we propose an alternative management objective that places a priority on improving the overall health of the community, instead of on eliminating rats, and we stress that management goals must address stakeholders’ goals as their investment is essential for a sustained program.

show abstract

Section: Did They Meet Methodological and Attribute Expectations?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: A Path For the New Change The Methodological And Attribute E...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Reduction Techniquesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Why or Why Haven't Municipal Approaches Met Expectations?mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Reconsidering the “War on Rats”: What We Know From Over a Century of Research Into Municipal Rat Management

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The important finding in Davis' study was that by properly maintaining the environment in a block in Baltimore, he could drastically reduce the rat population and keep it at that low level. Chemosterilants and predators which, like poison, do not reduce available food and shelter also have only a temporary affect on the rat population (2,7,12,21).…”

Section: Environmental Improvementmentioning

confidence: 99%