Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
J Am Mosq Control Assoc ; 35(2): 123-134, 2019 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31442134

ABSTRACT

The aims of this review were to compare planning for both mosquito control and land use in east-central Florida, USA, and in New South Wales, Queensland, and the Northern Territory, Australia. Saltwater mosquito production in mangroves and salt marsh is the predominant mosquito control concern in all the areas. Urban encroachment towards saltwater mosquito habitats is a problem in both Florida and Australia. In east-central Florida and the Northern Territory, mosquito control is supported by comprehensive source reduction programs, whereas in Queensland and New South Wales, larviciding is the main method of control. The long-term control by source reduction programs reduces vulnerability to mosquito issues as population encroaches towards wetlands, whereas larviciding programs have to respond repeatedly as problems arise. Problems from urban encroachment are exacerbated if mosquito control and land-use planning are not integrated. Further, urban planning that is not informed by mosquito management can lead to increased mosquito problems by inadvertent design or allowing residential development close to mosquito habitats. This increases the need for mosquito control and related resourcing. At the regional level of governance, Florida and the Northern Territory generally have greater integration between planning for development and mosquito control than at the local government level in New South Wales and Queensland, where there is a lack of integration between mosquito agencies and planners. It is concluded that coordination of planning and mosquito control is more effective at higher government levels than at local levels, which have less connectivity between management areas and/or insufficient resources. The lesson is that collaboration can assist in avoiding or resolving conflicts.


Subject(s)
Ecosystem , Mosquito Control/methods , Australia , Florida , Mosquito Control/instrumentation , Mosquito Control/statistics & numerical data
2.
J Am Mosq Control Assoc ; 34(1): 25-33, 2018 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31442118

ABSTRACT

Simple economic-based comparisons of source reduction and larvicide treatment are generally lacking in the mosquito control literature. The aim is to address this by developing an Excel tool that calculates the total present value (PV) of control methods. We use 15 years as the time frame, but this can be varied. Total PV is calculated based on the cost of each method at the start. A 3% discount rate is applied to recurring costs, and one-off costs are included throughout because they are part of the total PV. The data are based on information provided by mosquito control agencies in southeast Queensland, Australia. Values in the tool can be simply edited to reflect specific program characteristics. The outcome for the data used showed that source reduction is an appropriate option if maintenance is minimal. When major maintenance is needed, then larviciding may be the better option, particularly if money is the main consideration. However, if the frequency of applying larvicides increases, then source reduction becomes an increasingly attractive option.


Subject(s)
Culicidae , Mosquito Control/methods , Software , Animals , Culicidae/growth & development , Larva/growth & development , Mosquito Control/economics , Queensland
3.
J Am Mosq Control Assoc ; 30(2): 106-15, 2014 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-25102593

ABSTRACT

A group of researchers, mosquito and coastal managers, and consultants joined together to explore issues of concern to coastal and mosquito management in mangrove forests. At a 1-day workshop in Florida, participants identified issues that are important for their roles. The issues were subsequently compiled into a matrix and the participants were asked to individually assess the importance and urgency of each. The most important issues for everyone included habitat responses to management, community attitude, public education, interaction between agencies, local connectivity, sea-level rise (SLR) loss of wetlands, and conservation. Most urgent were public education, conservation easements, local connectivity, SLR, loss of wetland, restoration, and conservation. There were differing viewpoints among the roles that appeared to be related to responsibility for and ability to influence on-ground outcomes. This is reflected in mosquito and coastal managers who viewed issues broadly and ascribed higher levels of importance and urgency to them than did researchers and consultants. We concluded that collaboration is a key issue. Barriers to collaboration include knowledge differences between agencies. Facilitators of collaboration include interaction, trust, and shared goals.


Subject(s)
Conservation of Natural Resources , Culicidae/physiology , Mosquito Control/methods , Wetlands , Animals , Australia , United States
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...