3.4 Public Perceptions of Possum and Rabbit Control Technologies
3.4.1
Programme Title: Public perceptions and issues in the biological control of possums and rabbitsResearch Leader:Mr G Fitzgerald Institution:Fitzgerald Applied Sociology |
Summary
In this programme a report was compiled from data previously collected by focus group discussions with stakeholder groups and the public, as well as a comprehensive telephone survey. Participants’ perceptions and experience of possums and rabbits were examined, along with attitudes to various control technologies.
The data shows that the vast majority of the public believes that possums are a problem in New Zealand and threaten the country’s birdlife, native bush and to a lesser extent threaten overseas trade. Shooting remains the most acceptable method for killing possums for the New Zealand public. The next most acceptable methods are trapping and a possum specific poison. The least acceptable methods are aerial drops of 1080, and other poisons such as cyanide and pindone.
The survey found that by far the greatest risk is seen to lie in not controlling possums at all. Of the various control methods suggested, the greatest perceived risk is from an imported possum-specific virus, parasite or bacteria. Releasing a genetically engineered or modified organism that would attack only possums is seen as the least risky of the biological control options.
For the rabbit control technologies presented, 40 - 50% of respondents find poisons, the use of a naturally occurring virus, and GMO as unacceptable, whilst 30-40% of respondents accept the use of these technologies.
Slightly over 50% of respondents reported that they would support the introduction of RCD
Description
To prepare a report from data previously collected including:
- one paper to cover public perceptions surrounding possum control and the other public perceptions relating to the issue of rabbit control; and
- each paper to include a section on public perceptions of risk and outline the context in which the results of the research should be considered.
Approach & Outcomes
The report presents the results of a study into the social issues associated with, and public attitudes towards, the potential use of biological methods to control rabbits, possums, and bovine tuberculosis in New Zealand. The study was commissioned by MAF Policy and Landcare Research Ltd. The research involved a series of 11 focus group discussions with stakeholder groups and the public, as well as a comprehensive telephone survey of a random sample of 1127 members of the New Zealand public. In both exercises, participants’ perceptions and experience of possums and rabbits were examined, along with attitudes to various control technologies. The survey included the use of an advanced technique for measuring and mapping attitudes - the Galileo Multi-Dimensional Scaling Method. Where relevant, results from the survey were compared with previous studies.
Over three quarters of the population is aware that possums are considered a pest in New Zealand, and that possums carry bovine TB.
Shooting remains the most acceptable method for killing possums for the New Zealand public. The next most acceptable methods are trapping and a possum specific poison. The least acceptable methods are aerial drops of 1080, and other poisons such as cyanide and pindone. The increased acceptability of a (theoretical) poison which kills only possums appears to lie in its specificity.
Sixty eight percent of the survey respondents had heard of "biological control of pests", but only just under a third felt they could explain it to a friend. Males, rural residents and white collar workers are the best informed. The most acceptable of the biocontrol methods presented (i.e. to 84 % of the public) is one that stops possums breeding. The majority would not support a method which kills a young possum in the pouch or which makes possums more susceptible to natural disease. The latter are considered the least acceptable method for the biological control of possums.
As in the focus group discussions, the public is very keen to see safeguards for the development of a biological control agent for possums. The requirement that the biological control agent should not affect humans ranks as the most important in the development of a control method. This is followed, in order of importance, by the requirement that the control organism does not affect other animals, that the agent should not spread outside New Zealand, that it should be humane, and lastly that it should not require another organism as a vector.
It was found that over half to three quarters of the public said they would consider the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) acceptable, depending on the use.
In examining the public’s perceptions of the risks to the environment the economy and people’s health, the survey found that by far the greatest risk is seen to lie in not controlling possums at all. Of the various control methods suggested, the greatest perceived risk is from an imported possum-specific virus, parasite or bacteria. Releasing a genetically engineered or modified organism that would attack only possums is seen as the least risky of the biological control options.
Rabbits & Rabbit Control
Rabbits are considered to be harmful by 75% of respondents with both environmental and farm damage being associated with rabbits by 90-95% of the respondents. Although 50% of respondents report a personal concern about rabbits, nearly 75% reported that damage was likely throughout New Zealand. Group differences exist with urban residents, females, and non-members of conservation organisations all reporting lower levels of concern and damage.
For the rabbit control technologies presented, 40 - 50% of respondents find poisons, the use of a naturally occurring virus, and GMO as unacceptable, whilst 30-40% of respondents accept the use of these technologies. Females are less accepting than males of all technologies except trapping.
Slightly over 50% of respondents report that they would support the introduction of RCD whilst 43% provide a "no" or a "depends" response. The reasons provided with their response to the introduction of RCD suggest that the acceptors are looking for a practical solution to overcome rabbit impacts, whilst rejectors express concern about additional impacts on the environment and human health. The "depends" group identifies the potential for new problems to result from an introduction as the main types of reason.
New groupings were derived from the reasons provided with the response to introduce RCD. These groups identify that rejectors, ethically concerned and cautious respondents are less likely to accept the introduction of RCD, whilst the supporters and concerned supporters may accept these technologies. This would suggest that within a public discussion or debate, approximately 60% of respondents may reject RCD. From these results it appears that differences may have more of an ethical and moral basis and less of an attitudinal basis than expected.
Contact for Enquiries
Farm Monitoring Programme Manager
Monitoring and Evaluation
MAF Policy
PO Box 2526
Wellington
NEW ZEALAND
Phone: +64 4 894 0623
Fax: +64 4 894 0741
Contact this person
