evidoria

← Back to browse

Good practice Imported

Gough Island Restoration Programme — RSPB-Led Rodent Eradication for Critically Endangered Seabirds

Saint Helena, Ascension and Tristan da Cunha · Gough Island · See the Saint Helena, Ascension and Tristan da Cunha profile

Evidence: Observational / pre–post Top 90% 27/100 · Ask Evidence Copilot about this practice

RSPB's £9m aerial rodenticide operation to eradicate invasive mice from Gough Island temporarily lifted seabird breeding success (MacGillivray's Prion 6%→82%) before mice were re-detected months later — an honestly-reported failure reshaping future eradication planning.

9 GBP million
Programme cost
~6%
MacGillivray's Prion breeding success, pre-eradication baseline
82%
MacGillivray's Prion breeding success, post-baiting (interim)
~63%
Atlantic Petrel breeding success, post-baiting (interim)
~3 months
Time to mouse re-detection after baiting
Gough Island Restoration Programme — RSPB-Led Rodent Eradication for Critically Endangered Seabirds

Details

Maturity
Pilot
Promoter
RSPB (Royal Society for the Protection of Birds) & Government of Tristan da Cunha
Period
2019-2022 (island-wide baiting May-Aug 2021; monitoring ongoing)
Keywords
biodiversity conservation, invasive species control, seabird recovery

Context

Gough Island, a UK Overseas Territory in the South Atlantic and a UNESCO World Heritage Site, hosts globally important populations of albatrosses and petrels, but introduced house mice, arriving with 19th-century sealers, evolved into voracious predators of seabird chicks, driving several species toward extinction on the island.

Objectives

Eradicate invasive house mice island-wide to halt seabird chick predation and restore breeding success, in a first-ever attempt at whole-island mouse eradication.

Activities

In 2019 the RSPB, the Government of Tristan da Cunha, BirdLife South Africa, South Africa's Department of Environment, Forestry and Fisheries, the Royal Zoological Society of Scotland and Island Conservation launched the £9 million Gough Island Restoration Programme, funded in part by the UK Government, Darwin Plus, the EU's EDF-9 and the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation. Between May and August 2021 an expert team broadcast brodifacoum rodenticide bait (20 ppm active ingredient, ~8 kg/ha per application) island-wide by helicopter.

Results

The operation was not fully successful: a single surviving mouse was detected roughly three months later, and the population had rebounded by the following summer, per peer-reviewed monitoring published in Animal Conservation. In the interim, however, breeding success climbed sharply - MacGillivray's Prion success rose from an average of around 6% to 82%, and Atlantic Petrel success roughly doubled to about 63% - direct, quantified evidence of the mice's impact and of what full eradication could achieve.

Conclusions

The RSPB has been transparent about the setback and is using the lessons, including interference from invasive slugs during baiting, to plan a future eradication attempt.

Implementation

Indicative cost
High (€500k–€5M) — £9 million total programme cost
Time to results
Medium (1–3 years) — Launched 2019; island-wide baiting May-August 2021; monitoring ongoing through 2022
Staffing & skills
RSPB (Royal Society for the Protection of Birds) - lead, Government of Tristan da Cunha, BirdLife South Africa, South Africa's Department of Environment, Forestry and Fisheries, Royal Zoological Society of Scotland, Island Conservation

Conditions for success

  • Multi-partner international consortium with named technical roles
  • Substantial dedicated funding (£9m) from the UK Government, Darwin Plus, EU EDF-9 and the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation
  • Aerial (helicopter) island-wide bait broadcast at a defined concentration and application rate

Common failure modes

  • A single surviving mouse was detected roughly three months after baiting and the population rebounded by the next summer - the eradication ultimately failed
  • Interference from invasive slugs during baiting affected bait uptake
  • A successful repeat eradication attempt is still pending

Commonly funded by

National / regional programmes Philanthropic / foundation funding

Indicative funding routes for practices of this type — always check each programme's current calls and eligibility rules.

Replication kit

Reusable artefacts from this practice — as published by their sources.

Do you run this practice? Claim it — verified implementers get a public contact pathway and can propose corrections.

Data sources

Where this practice's information was retrieved from, and when.

Attachments

Similar practices you may find useful