Flying-foxes in the Australian urban environment—community attitudes and opinions

Abstract

The urban presence of flying-foxes (pteropid bats) in eastern Australia has increased in the last 20 years, putatively reflecting broader landscape change. The influx of large numbers often precipitates community angst, typically stemming from concerns about loss of social amenity, economic loss or negative health impacts from recently emerged bat-mediated zoonotic diseases such as Hendra virus and Australian bat lyssavirus. Local authorities and state wildlife authorities are increasingly asked to approve the dispersal or modification of flying-fox roosts to address expressed concerns, yet the scale of this concern within the community, and the veracity of the basis for concern are often unclear. We conducted an on-line survey to capture community attitudes and opinions on flying-foxes in the urban environment to inform management policy and decision-making. Analysis focused on awareness, concerns, and management options, and primarily compared responses from communities where flying-fox management was and was not topical at the time of the survey. While a majority of respondents indicated a moderate to high level of knowledge of both flying-foxes and Hendra virus, a substantial minority mistakenly believed that flying-foxes pose a direct infection risk to humans, suggesting miscommunication or misinformation, and the need for additional risk communication strategies. Secondly, a minority of community members indicated they were directly impacted by urban roosts, most plausibly those living in close proximity to the roost, suggesting that targeted management options are warranted. Thirdly, neither dispersal nor culling was seen as an appropriate management strategy by the majority of respondents, including those from postcodes where flying-fox management was topical. These findings usefully inform community debate and policy development and demonstrate the value of social analysis in defining the issues and options in this complex human–wildlife interaction. The mobile nature of flying-foxes underlines the need for a management strategy at a regional or larger scale, and independent of state borders.

Land Manager Perspectives on Conflict Mitigation Strategies for Urban Flying-Fox Camps

“…For example, in one instance there was a "neighbourhood war basically between two neighbours, one who loved the bats and one who hated them" (Interview #8). This is consistent with other research on the perceptions of bats [20,21] which found they were "very different things to different people" [37]. Instances such as these highlight the presence of differing values for wildlife, which makes decision-making about the appropriate response very challenging.…”

Global Crisis Leadership for Disease‐Induced Threats: One Health and Urbanisation

“…The former is a consequence of the noise, soiling and smell typically attendant with large numbers of flying‐foxes; the latter primarily reflects public concern about bat‐mediated zoonotic diseases such as Hendra virus and Australian bat lyssavirus, both of which have caused sporadic human fatalities. (Kung et al, 2015, p. 24)…”

“…Kilpatrick (2011) shows how Culex pipiens (the common house mosquito), which carries the West Nile virus, increase in numbers with urbanisation. In Australia, Firth and Zuelke (2014) discuss how possums are a major source of zoonotic bacteria in drinking water and, also in Australia, Kung et al (2015) show how the urban presence of ‘flying‐foxes’ (pteropid bats) present risks for public health. The species have become increasingly urbanised in the past 20 years due to changes in the rural landscape.…”

From cleared buffers to camp dispersal: mitigating impacts of the Kareela flying-fox camp on adjacent residents and schools

“…Several local councils face the challenges of mitigating the impacts of flying-fox camps on their communities (e.g. Hall 2002;Roberts 2006;Kung et al 2015). The management of these issues requires councils to find a balance between legal obligations, conservation of a threatened species and the needs of the community (Thiriet 2010;Holmes and Walker 2011;Currey et al 2018).…”

“…However, this action would not be consistent with conservation objectives nor community amenity objectives. Based on the complexity and challenges involved in flying-fox camp dispersal, this option is rarely deemed an appropriate management action by informed stakeholders (Kung et al 2015).…”