Birds of prey and carnivorous mammals feed on small birds, rodents and other small mammals. Humans perceive many of the prey animals of these predators as well as the predators themselves, as “pests”, and seek to control them. Control methods for these unwanted pests, particularly rodents, have the potential to impact non-target species as well, such as San Joaquin kit fox (Vulpes macrotis mutica), bobcat (Felis rufus), mountain lion (Puma concolor), and coyote (Canis latrans). Non-target animals may come into contact with rodenticides in three different ways: eating the rodenticides directly, eating animals that have not metabolized the rodenticides and may have undigested anticoagulants in their stomach or cheek pouches,or eating animals that have metabolized the rodenticides. Predators consuming such animals are poisoned.I used existing data collected in 2007 from two locations in California, USA. These locations were chosen because local biologists observed possible lethal effects of anticoagulants on non-target wildlife. Southwest areas of Bakersfield were the first location.The second study area consisted of portions of southeastern Ventura and western Los Angeles Counties in proximity to the Santa Monica Mountains National Recreation Area. Within a broader social context, my results support trends in the household data presented by Morzillo and Mertig (2001 a, b) and Morzillo and Schwartz (2011), and expand our knowledge within a new context related to rodent control practices of businesses. Pest control was ubiquitous across respondents from both locations, and a wide range of selected control products and practices was reported.
|Publisher||Oregon State University|
|Degree||Baccalaureate of Science|
|University||Oregon State University|
|Cite this work||
Researchers should cite this work as follows: