Search the SPREP Catalogue

Rodents remain one of the most widespread and damaging invasive alien species on islands globally. The current toolbox for insular rodent eradications is reliant on the application of sufficient anticoagulant toxicant into every potential rodent territory across an island. Despite significant advances in the use of these toxicants over recent decades, numerous situations remain where eradication is challenging or not yet feasible. These include islands with significant human populations, unreceptive stakeholder communities, co-occurrence of livestock and domestic animals, or vulnerability of native species. Developments in diverse branches of science, particularly the medical, pharmaceutical, invertebrate pest control, social science, technology and defense fields offer potential insights into the next generation of tools to eradicate rodents from islands. Horizon scanning is a structured process whereby current problems are assessed against potential future solutions. We undertook such an exercise to identify the most promising technologies, techniques and approaches that might be applied to rodent eradications from islands. We highlight a Rattus-specific toxicant, RNA interference as species-specific toxicants, rodenticide research, crab deterrent in baits, prophylactic treatment for protection of non-target species, transgenic rodents, virus vectored immunocontraception, drones, self-resetting traps and toxicant applicators, detection probability models and improved stakeholder community engagement methods. We present a brief description of each method, and discuss its application to rodent eradication on islands, knowledge gaps, challenges, whether it is incremental or transformative in nature and provide a potential timeline for availability. We outline how a combination of new tools may render previously intractable rodent eradication problems feasible.

These guidelines provide a practical approach to Social Impact Assessment (SIA). They are designed to help readers learn the basics about how to conduct an SIA, contribute to an SIA, use the results of an SIA, and judge if an SIA is fit for purpose. When writing the guidelines, we have assumed that readers may have little or no prior experience with SIA. The need for guidelines for SIA became apparent during our research with regional communities experiencing the social impacts of economic regeneration projects, including infrastructure, housing, irrigation, tourism and heritage conservation. During our work, we encountered many community leaders who were keen to learn how to assess the social impacts of the plans they design, how to take this information and use it to make decisions, and then, overtime, evaluate the outcomes for communities. When writing and testing the guidelines, we drew on our own professional expertise in SIA, and the experiences of potential guideline users including: community organisations, iwi members, central government agencies, local government economic development and planning professionals, infrastructure providers, sector groups, evaluation practitioners, consultancies, students, and academics. We also drew on the ideas of practitioners of SIA in conferences and training sessions1 , and other invaluable sources that are listed in the Annexes. SIA looks at the potential impacts of change proposal, focusing on who is affected, where and how, and what might be done to improve the results in the short, medium, and long-term. We expect that the guidelines will be useful for anyone proposing changes that affect people and communities, as well as those experiencing social impacts.

… 2001). Home range estimates for stoats vary according to gender, season, and food availability (Erlinge 1977; Murphy …