Feral cat control: improving Eradicat® bait efficiency and effectiveness for fauna conservation in the Southern Jarrah Forest, Western Australia

IF 16.4 1区 化学 Q1 CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY Accounts of Chemical Research Pub Date : 2024-08-22 DOI:10.1071/wr24073
Adrian F. Wayne, Marika A. Maxwell, Colin G. Ward, Jodie Quinn
{"title":"Feral cat control: improving Eradicat® bait efficiency and effectiveness for fauna conservation in the Southern Jarrah Forest, Western Australia","authors":"Adrian F. Wayne, Marika A. Maxwell, Colin G. Ward, Jodie Quinn","doi":"10.1071/wr24073","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<strong> Context</strong><p>Toxic meat baits are the most effective broadscale method used for reducing the densities and impacts of feral cats (<i>Felis catus</i>) on vulnerable Australian native fauna when alternative prey is minimal.</p><strong> Aims</strong><p>Our aim was to assess the efficiency (proportion of baits removed by target animals) and effectiveness (proportion of target animals removed) of <i>Eradicat</i>® baits and to identify how their use may be improved in Southern Jarrah Forest ecosystems of Western Australia. We sought to determine how, when, and where best to deploy baits using the current <i>Eradicat</i>® bait prescriptions to maximise the reduction of feral cats.</p><strong> Methods</strong><p><i>Eradicat</i>® uptake trials were conducted over a 15-month period using remote sensor cameras (RSCs) to observe animals interacting with the baits at 40 sites. Ten successive baiting trials were conducted, each involving four randomly selected sites (two replicates for each of two bait deployment methods: clusters and transects).</p><strong> Key results</strong><p>The fate of 5658 <i>Eradicat®</i> baits at 2000 bait locations was recorded during 54,361 camera trap nights. Despite occupancy rates being high for cat and fox (<i>Vulpes vulpes</i>), (92% and 84%, respectively), the efficiency and effectiveness of <i>Eradicat</i>® baits was low for both introduced predators (cat: 0.1% and 10–12%, respectively; and fox: &lt;0.6% and 8–20%, respectively). There were no major differences in baiting efficiency in relation to bait deployment method or time of year. More than half (56–58%) of the baits were removed by non-target animals prior to an introduced predator being observed on camera at the bait location. Along transects, there were more cat and fox visits closer to tracks and surface water features. Foxes were also more likely to visit bait locations closer to private property. Younger cats appeared to be more interested and more likely to eat a bait than older cats.</p><strong> Conclusions</strong><p>Substantial improvements could be made by increasing bait availability (reducing non-target interference), detectability and attractiveness to cats.</p><strong> Implications</strong><p>Additional introduced predator threat abatement methods may be needed for the conservation and recovery of many threatened native mammals in the Southern Jarrah Forests and elsewhere in Australia. Feral cat baiting should be conducted within an integrated and holistic invasive animal management system.</p>","PeriodicalId":1,"journal":{"name":"Accounts of Chemical Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":16.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Accounts of Chemical Research","FirstCategoryId":"99","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1071/wr24073","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"化学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Context

Toxic meat baits are the most effective broadscale method used for reducing the densities and impacts of feral cats (Felis catus) on vulnerable Australian native fauna when alternative prey is minimal.

Aims

Our aim was to assess the efficiency (proportion of baits removed by target animals) and effectiveness (proportion of target animals removed) of Eradicat® baits and to identify how their use may be improved in Southern Jarrah Forest ecosystems of Western Australia. We sought to determine how, when, and where best to deploy baits using the current Eradicat® bait prescriptions to maximise the reduction of feral cats.

Methods

Eradicat® uptake trials were conducted over a 15-month period using remote sensor cameras (RSCs) to observe animals interacting with the baits at 40 sites. Ten successive baiting trials were conducted, each involving four randomly selected sites (two replicates for each of two bait deployment methods: clusters and transects).

Key results

The fate of 5658 Eradicat® baits at 2000 bait locations was recorded during 54,361 camera trap nights. Despite occupancy rates being high for cat and fox (Vulpes vulpes), (92% and 84%, respectively), the efficiency and effectiveness of Eradicat® baits was low for both introduced predators (cat: 0.1% and 10–12%, respectively; and fox: <0.6% and 8–20%, respectively). There were no major differences in baiting efficiency in relation to bait deployment method or time of year. More than half (56–58%) of the baits were removed by non-target animals prior to an introduced predator being observed on camera at the bait location. Along transects, there were more cat and fox visits closer to tracks and surface water features. Foxes were also more likely to visit bait locations closer to private property. Younger cats appeared to be more interested and more likely to eat a bait than older cats.

Conclusions

Substantial improvements could be made by increasing bait availability (reducing non-target interference), detectability and attractiveness to cats.

Implications

Additional introduced predator threat abatement methods may be needed for the conservation and recovery of many threatened native mammals in the Southern Jarrah Forests and elsewhere in Australia. Feral cat baiting should be conducted within an integrated and holistic invasive animal management system.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
野猫控制:提高 Eradicat® 诱饵在西澳大利亚南贾拉森林动物保护中的效率和效果
背景有毒肉饵是在替代猎物极少的情况下降低野猫(Felis catus)密度和减少其对澳大利亚脆弱本地动物影响的最有效的大规模方法。目的我们的目的是评估 Eradicat® 诱饵的效率(目标动物除去诱饵的比例)和效果(除去目标动物的比例),并确定如何改进其在西澳大利亚南贾拉森林生态系统中的使用。我们试图确定如何、何时以及在何处使用当前的 Eradicat® 诱饵处方最有效地投放诱饵,以最大限度地减少野猫的数量。方法 在为期 15 个月的时间里,我们使用遥感摄像机 (RSC) 在 40 个地点进行了 Eradicat® 投饵试验,观察动物与诱饵的互动情况。连续进行了 10 次诱饵试验,每次试验涉及 4 个随机选择的地点(两种诱饵投放方法:集群法和横断法各两个重复)。主要结果在 54,361 个照相陷阱夜里,记录了 2000 个诱饵点的 5658 个 Eradicat® 诱饵的去向。尽管猫和狐狸(Vulpes vulpes)的占用率很高(分别为 92% 和 84%),但 Eradicat® 诱饵对这两种引入的掠食者的效率和效果都很低(猫:0.1%;狐狸:10-12%):分别为 0.1% 和 10-12%;狐狸分别为 0.6% 和 8-20%)。投饵效率与投饵方法或投饵时间没有重大差异。半数以上(56-58%)的诱饵是在摄像头观察到诱饵位置有引入的捕食者之前被非目标动物移除的。在横断面上,更多的猫和狐狸靠近足迹和地表水特征。狐狸也更有可能光顾靠近私有财产的诱饵地点。与年长的猫相比,年轻的猫似乎对诱饵更感兴趣,也更有可能吃到诱饵。结论通过增加诱饵的可用性(减少非目标干扰)、可探测性和对猫的吸引力,可以大大提高诱饵的利用率。启示为了保护和恢复南贾拉森林和澳大利亚其他地方许多受威胁的本地哺乳动物,可能需要采用其他引入的捕食者威胁消减方法。野猫诱饵应该在综合全面的入侵动物管理系统中进行。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Accounts of Chemical Research
Accounts of Chemical Research 化学-化学综合
CiteScore
31.40
自引率
1.10%
发文量
312
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: Accounts of Chemical Research presents short, concise and critical articles offering easy-to-read overviews of basic research and applications in all areas of chemistry and biochemistry. These short reviews focus on research from the author’s own laboratory and are designed to teach the reader about a research project. In addition, Accounts of Chemical Research publishes commentaries that give an informed opinion on a current research problem. Special Issues online are devoted to a single topic of unusual activity and significance. Accounts of Chemical Research replaces the traditional article abstract with an article "Conspectus." These entries synopsize the research affording the reader a closer look at the content and significance of an article. Through this provision of a more detailed description of the article contents, the Conspectus enhances the article's discoverability by search engines and the exposure for the research.
期刊最新文献
Management of Cholesteatoma: Hearing Rehabilitation. Congenital Cholesteatoma. Evaluation of Cholesteatoma. Management of Cholesteatoma: Extension Beyond Middle Ear/Mastoid. Recidivism and Recurrence.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1