Stakeholder perspectives towards the use of toxicants for managing wild pigs

Abstract

Wild pigs (Sus scrofa) are one of the most detrimental invasive mammals in the US. Lack of adequate population control has allowed pigs to become established across the landscape, causing significant ecological and economic damage. Given the need for additional tools for reducing wild pig populations, two toxicants, warfarin and sodium nitrite, are at the forefront of the discussion regarding future wild pig management. However, no research has examined stakeholders’ perspectives towards the use of toxicants in wild pig management. Given the lack of knowledge, our goal was to determine stakeholders’ perspectives towards the legal use of toxicants for managing wild pigs. We surveyed 1822 individuals from three stakeholder groups (hunters, farmers, and forestland owners) across Alabama during February 2018 using an online survey following the Tailored Design Method. All three stakeholder groups were generally supportive of toxicant use, though their views differed slightly by group. Furthermore, all stakeholder groups were supportive of toxicant purchasing and use regulations, while accidental water contamination, human health impact, and incorrect usage of a toxicant were stakeholders’ greatest concerns. These results indicate that these groups would likely be in support of using toxicants for wild pig management in Alabama and could be a model for other states or locations. Consequently, these results have direct implications for shaping policy and possible use of toxicants as a future wild pig management tool.

Perceptions of Wild Pig Impact, Management, and Policy in Alabama

“…The remaining ~87% occurred between hunters and farmers (~46%) or hunters and forestland owners (~41%). Despite having a large number of statistically significant differences between groups, most were not sociologically significant, as had been found with stakeholder views on use of toxicants (TuckerWilliams et al 2021 ). In no instance did one group’s perspective drastically conflict with another’s.…”

“…Respondents were from every county in Alabama, with Baldwin, Mobile, Jefferson, and Tuscaloosa County having the greatest number of respondents. (See TuckerWilliams et al 2021 for full description of stakeholders’ demographics).…”

“…Therefore, AFOA members likely did not notice the survey option within the body of the email. However, despite the low sample size, forestland owner responses were similar to the other two groups and therefore are included in the analyses, but contextualized based on their sample size (TuckerWilliams et al 2021 ).…”

“…Specifically, our objectives were to: 1) determine stakeholder perceptions on wild pig populations and trends across landownerships; 2) gain a detailed understanding of private land management of wild pigs; 3) determine stakeholder beliefs regarding the impact wild pigs have on the environment, economy, human health, and wildlife; 4) quantify stakeholders’ perspectives towards current wild pig related policy; and, 5) determine if perspectives differed between stakeholder group (hunter, farmer, and forestland owner). We addressed these objectives across the state of Alabama as it has been markedly affected by wild pigs (McKee et al 2020 ; TuckerWilliams et al 2021 ) and represents an ideal location to evaluate stakeholder views and management options.…”