A survey on attitudes toward control of forest insects

Abstract

This paper reports a survey of residents of five communities in Ontario about their attitudes to the nature and control of infestations by two forest insect pests; the gypsy moth and the jack pine budworm. The survey results indicate that people feel they are generally familiar with both insects, but gypsy moth is more widely known. Despite the fact that respondents had different experiences with infestations, these differences did not noticeably influence attitudes towards control. Most respondents felt some control action was desirable. A biological pesticide was consistently preferred across all communities, however, respondents from communities affected by gypsy moth were more likely to prefer letting an infestation run its course than respondents from communities affected by jack pine budwom. In contrast, respondents from jack pine budworm communities were more likely to favour any type of pesticide-biological or chemical -than were respondents from gypsy moth communities. Despite widespread preference for the use of Bt, a biological pesticide, people were not willing to pay directly for this or any other management approach as they felt that responsibility for control rested elsewhere. An important underlying message is that if resource managers want the public to differentiate pest management options more critically, information programs likely need to more heavily stress the ecological and economic differences between insects.

Public attitudes about forest pest outbreaks and control: Case studies in two Canadian provinces

“…For instance, we found that an overwhelming majority of respondents in both provinces: (1) supported control of future SBW and FTC outbreaks with biological control; (2) thought that the provincial government should fund research and development for improving biological control measures to reduce pest-related forest losses; and (3) placed highest priority to the protection of ecologically sensitive areas and wildlife habitat. These results are consistent with findings of MacDonald et al (1998), Wagner et al (1998a,b), and McFarlane et al (2006 who found that the public in various parts of North America were much more willing to support use of biological control over chemical control. McFarlane et al (2006) further found that the general public in two communities adjacent to National Parks in Western Canada viewed pest outbreaks as unhealthy for the ecosystem and that undertaking pest control activities would improve the ecological integrity of the areas.…”

“…Results that NB residents were significantly more aware about previous SBW outbreaks than SK residents, and vice-versa for FTC, are also consistent with MacDonald et al (1998), Flint (2006), and McFarlane et al (2006, who found that the public is generally more familiar and well informed about forest pests that affect their communities relatively severely. In the current case, NB and SK publics have experienced predominantly SBW or FTC outbreaks respectively in the past (Fig.…”

Public Attitudes towards Forest Pest Damage Cost and Future Control Extent: A Case Study from Two Cities of Pakistan

“…The results demonstrating that QU residents were statistically more aware of prior SLB outbreaks than PE residents coincide with the findings of MacDonald et al [51], Flint [53], and Chang et al [28], who stated that the general public tends to be more familiar and well conversant with forest pests that affect neighborhoods somewhat severely. The QU and PE public have suffered notable SLB outbreaks [3].…”

“…The fact that those who know about pest attributes want a greater proportion of forest protected from pests that do cause greater harm (i.e., SLB) gives plausibility to the theory that information might impact choice of control extent. These results support MacDonald et al's [51] claim that "if resource executives want the public to evaluate pest control alternatives more precisely, public relations efforts should likely emphasize the ecological and economic contrasts of insect". As a result, by making such evidence available to the public, policymakers and forest managers will be more qualified to develop publicly permissible pest control strategies.…”