<p>Biocontrol can be an effective tool in managing unwanted species and for environmental management. In-depth understanding of public perceptions and attitudes of biocontrol is critical to securing constructive public engagement in biocontrol initiatives. This study used mixed methods survey research with 155 Australian participants to identify key drivers of attitudes and perceptions and their associated impacts on acceptance of biocontrol. In addition, the study assesses if there were differences between public perceptions of, and attitudes towards, biocontrol in&#xa0;principle and the specific case of dung beetles introduced into Australia to mitigate issues arising from dung accumulation. The results indicate that while participants believe dung beetles are safer and more effective than biocontrol in principle, they consider them less necessary. Identification of biocontrol as an ethical approach to environmental management was the only shared driver of acceptance and positive attitude towards both biocontrol in general and dung beetles in particular. Positive perceptions of dung beetles were also motivated by identifying them as effective and useful. On the other hand, acceptance of biocontrol in principle was also driven by the perception that introducing an agent would pose limited threats to biodiversity, higher confidence in governance, and respondents being older. This study identifies the need for further research exploring the ethical positions of diverse publics to strengthen understanding of the factors driving acceptance or rejection of biocontrol in specific contexts. We conclude that a more nuanced and detailed approach to ethics could improve communication strategies, strengthen public-science trust and enhance scientific practices and outcomes.</p>