Rodent control on the front line: knowledge and practices of pest controllers on the use of anticoagulant rodenticides

BACKGROUND: Synanthropic rodents are globally perceived as pests because of their adaptability to anthropogenic environments, and result in significant challenges to food and health security. Rodent control with anticoagulant rodenticides (ARs) has been widely implemented to minimize economic losses, despite concerns about the impacts of ARs. This study aims to evaluate AR use and knowledge among pest management professionals (PMPs). Using an online survey, we aimed to: (i) assess PMPs' training; (ii) identify commonly used control methods; (iii) evaluate dependency on ARs; and (iv) evaluate PMPs' levels of knowledge about ARs and their impacts. RESULTS: Seventy-seven questionnaires were obtained from PMPs in all regions of mainland and insular Portugal. Among the PMPs, 96% reported using ARs, with brodifacoum and bromadiolone the most frequent choices. Despite nearly half of professionals reported that they used integrated pest management (IPM), no correlation with a reduction in AR use was found. Only 13% of the respondent PMPs reported not having training in the use of ARs, yet in general, they reveal a limited knowledge of the long-term impacts of ARs. Although, most of respondents were 'concerned' about secondary poisoning and environmental contamination, few chose a control method based on the impacts of ARs. CONCLUSIONS: PMPs reveal a high dependency on ARs, even when implementing IPM strategies. Besides the concern with environmental contamination and secondary poisoning the logistical factors were still determinant in the choice of rodent methods of control, maybe due to an incomplete knowledge about the long-term effects of AR. Improving PMPs education could support better implementation of IPM principles, encouraging more sustainable and responsible rodent control practices.