Kung, N. Y., Field, H. E., McLaughlin, A., Edson, D., Taylor, M. (2015) Flying-foxes in the Australian urban environment—community attitudes and opinions. One Heal. 1, 24-30.

Kung, N. Y., Field, H. E., McLaughlin, A., Edson, D., Taylor, M. (2015) Flying-foxes in the Australian urban environment—community attitudes and opinions. One Heal. 1, 24-30.

Aim: 
To capture community attitudes and opinions on flying-foxes in the urban environment to inform management policy and decisionmaking.
Type of Study: 
Correlational
Key Results: 
A majority of respondents indicated a moderate to high level of knowledge of both flying-foxes and Hendra virus, yet a substantial minority mistakenly believed that flying-foxes pose a direct Hendra virus infection risk to humans. A minority of community members indicated they were directly impacted by urban roosts. Neither dispersal nor cullingwas seen as an appropriate management strategy by the majority of respondents, including those from postcodes where flying-fox management was topical.
Treatments: 
Areas where Damage Mitigation Permits had vs had not been issued
Response: 
Misunderstanding, miscommunication or misinformation about disease risk is a real issue, and there is a need for additional risk communication. The fact that only a minority of community members are directly impacted by urban roosts suggests that targeted management options should receive more consideration. The mobile nature of flying-foxes underlines the need for a management strategy at a regional or largerscale, and independent of state borders.strategies
Models: 
Chi-square tests
Comments: 
This was a social study
Reviewer: 
Pia Lentini
Locations: 
Queensland
Response variable : 
People's attitudes and opinions about flying-foxes
Replication: 
2744 survey respondents
Ecosystem: 
NA
Full Reference: 
Kung, N. Y., Field, H. E., McLaughlin, A., Edson, D., Taylor, M. (2015) Flying-foxes in the Australian urban environment—community attitudes and opinions. One Heal. 1, 24-30.