C. Geeraerts, Anne L. Rutten, Emma Cartuyvels, P. Verschelde, S. Devisscher, F. Turkelboom, P. Quataert, J. Casaer
Wild boar (Sus scrofa) reappeared in Flanders, Belgium in 2006 after more than half a century of absence. Besides being a native and highly valued game species in Europe, wild boar are also known to be responsible for car collisions, crop damage, disease transmission, and ecological damage at high densities. The management of wild boar therefore seeks to balance these positive and negative impacts. Given the highly fragmented landscape in Flanders and its multifunctional use, coexistence with wild boar is only possible through integrated management involving relevant stakeholder groups. However, to be successful, this requires that the management objectives, the overall wild boar policy of the Flemish authorities, and management actions are supported by the stakeholders. To assess the support for the current management, we conducted a survey among members of the 3 key stakeholder groups: farmers, hunters, and conservationists. Our survey assessed the importance stakeholders attribute to different management objectives, their support for the current legal provisions, and how desirable the different stakeholder groups considered possible management actions. The potential for conflict index was used to analyze the (dis)agreement between and within stakeholder groups. Reducing or preventing crop damage and the risk for car accidents are indicated as being the most important management objectives by all 3 stakeholder groups. Stakeholder groups differ strongly in their support for the current legal provisions. Those stakeholders that have to implement the legal provisions or are mostly affected by these laws are less supportive than others. The desirability of the possible management actions strongly varied according to the different stakeholder groups. Contrary to other studies, the desirability of a possible management action was hardly influenced by the management objective it tried to achieve.
{"title":"Wild Boar in Flanders, Belgium: (Dis)agreements Between Key Stakeholders on Wild Boar Management Objectives, Actions, and Legal Provisions","authors":"C. Geeraerts, Anne L. Rutten, Emma Cartuyvels, P. Verschelde, S. Devisscher, F. Turkelboom, P. Quataert, J. Casaer","doi":"10.26077/2D91-8A88","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.26077/2D91-8A88","url":null,"abstract":"Wild boar (Sus scrofa) reappeared in Flanders, Belgium in 2006 after more than half a century of absence. Besides being a native and highly valued game species in Europe, wild boar are also known to be responsible for car collisions, crop damage, disease transmission, and ecological damage at high densities. The management of wild boar therefore seeks to balance these positive and negative impacts. Given the highly fragmented landscape in Flanders and its multifunctional use, coexistence with wild boar is only possible through integrated management involving relevant stakeholder groups. However, to be successful, this requires that the management objectives, the overall wild boar policy of the Flemish authorities, and management actions are supported by the stakeholders. To assess the support for the current management, we conducted a survey among members of the 3 key stakeholder groups: farmers, hunters, and conservationists. Our survey assessed the importance stakeholders attribute to different management objectives, their support for the current legal provisions, and how desirable the different stakeholder groups considered possible management actions. The potential for conflict index was used to analyze the (dis)agreement between and within stakeholder groups. Reducing or preventing crop damage and the risk for car accidents are indicated as being the most important management objectives by all 3 stakeholder groups. Stakeholder groups differ strongly in their support for the current legal provisions. Those stakeholders that have to implement the legal provisions or are mostly affected by these laws are less supportive than others. The desirability of the possible management actions strongly varied according to the different stakeholder groups. Contrary to other studies, the desirability of a possible management action was hardly influenced by the management objective it tried to achieve.","PeriodicalId":13095,"journal":{"name":"Human–Wildlife Interactions","volume":"31 1","pages":"15"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-08-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"84722936","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Human–wildlife conflicts (HWCs) are on the increase due to shrinking space that results in increased competition for land, water, and other natural resources between humans and wildlife. Investigating the occurrence of HWCs is important in that the results can be used to formulate better management policies and strategies. In this paper, we describe the nature of HWCs emerging between humans and the Nile crocodile (Crocodylus niloticus) and between humans and the African hippopotamus (Hippopotamus amphibius; hippo) on Lake Kariba, Zimbabwe. Lake Kariba is the second largest manmade lake by volume in the world. Conflicts involving humans and these species are readily noticeable and played out around water bodies, which are sources of daily human sustenance and important habitats for aquatic wildlife. We used a mixed-methods approach to gather data on these conflicts, including questionnaires, face-to-face interviews, focus group discussions, and participant observation. The research participants involved national parks officials, fishing camp residents, and HWC victims. Our research confirmed that crocodiles and hippos have negatively affected humans through deaths, injuries, instilling fear, and destruction of sources of livelihood for fishermen such as fishing nets and boats. In retaliation, humans have implemented lethal methods to remove problem animals. The results of this research can inform the conservation community about the severity of the conflicts, which have been exacerbated by current economic hardships, to better inform conservation policies.
{"title":"Interactions Between Humans, Crocodiles, and Hippos at Lake Kariba, Zimbabwe","authors":"I. Marowa, Joshua Matanzima, T. Nhiwatiwa","doi":"10.26077/765A-76F4","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.26077/765A-76F4","url":null,"abstract":"Human–wildlife conflicts (HWCs) are on the increase due to shrinking space that results in increased competition for land, water, and other natural resources between humans and wildlife. Investigating the occurrence of HWCs is important in that the results can be used to formulate better management policies and strategies. In this paper, we describe the nature of HWCs emerging between humans and the Nile crocodile (Crocodylus niloticus) and between humans and the African hippopotamus (Hippopotamus amphibius; hippo) on Lake Kariba, Zimbabwe. Lake Kariba is the second largest manmade lake by volume in the world. Conflicts involving humans and these species are readily noticeable and played out around water bodies, which are sources of daily human sustenance and important habitats for aquatic wildlife. We used a mixed-methods approach to gather data on these conflicts, including questionnaires, face-to-face interviews, focus group discussions, and participant observation. The research participants involved national parks officials, fishing camp residents, and HWC victims. Our research confirmed that crocodiles and hippos have negatively affected humans through deaths, injuries, instilling fear, and destruction of sources of livelihood for fishermen such as fishing nets and boats. In retaliation, humans have implemented lethal methods to remove problem animals. The results of this research can inform the conservation community about the severity of the conflicts, which have been exacerbated by current economic hardships, to better inform conservation policies.","PeriodicalId":13095,"journal":{"name":"Human–Wildlife Interactions","volume":"1 1","pages":"25"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"90194318","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Conflict between crop farmers and wild nonhuman primates is a worldwide conservation issue of increasing concern. Most of the research on wild primate crop foraging has so far focused on the conflicts with subsistence agriculture. Crop damage caused by primate foraging in large-scale commercial agriculture is also a major facet of human–wildlife conflict. Despite its increasing severity, there are very few published accounts of on-farm wild primate crop-foraging behavior or effective techniques to deter primates from field crops on commercial farms. To address this knowledge gap and identify some mitigation strategies, we used direct observation from a hide to collect behaviors and interspecific interactions between chacma baboons (Papio ursinus; baboons) and vervet monkeys (Chlorocebus pygerythrus; vervets) foraging in a 1-ha butternut squash (Cucurbita moschata) field for 4 months (May to August) in 2013 on a 564-ha commercial farm in the Blouberg District of South Africa. Baboons caused the most crop damage, foraged on crops more in the mornings, and their rates of crop foraging were influenced primarily by natural vegetation productivity. Vervet monkey rates of crop foraging were primarily influenced by the presence of baboons. When baboons or vervets visited the farm, half of the visits did not involve crop foraging, and vervets were more likely to crop forage when they visited than baboons. Based on this preliminary study, we make recommendations for crop farmers to improve the effectiveness of current deterrent methods. These include increasing deterrent efforts when natural vegetation drops below a normalized difference vegetation index value of 0.32, especially during the hours before midday, chasing baboons and vervets farther from the farm rather than just out of crop fields, and increasing the perceived mortality risk of field guards. These recommendations should be evaluated to determine effectiveness before being adopted on a wider scale.
{"title":"Baboon and Vervet Monkey Crop-Foraging Behaviors on a Commercial South African Farm: Preliminary Implications for Damage Mitigation","authors":"Leah J. Findlay, R. A. Hill","doi":"10.26077/5DBC-B920","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.26077/5DBC-B920","url":null,"abstract":"Conflict between crop farmers and wild nonhuman primates is a worldwide conservation issue of increasing concern. Most of the research on wild primate crop foraging has so far focused on the conflicts with subsistence agriculture. Crop damage caused by primate foraging in large-scale commercial agriculture is also a major facet of human–wildlife conflict. Despite its increasing severity, there are very few published accounts of on-farm wild primate crop-foraging behavior or effective techniques to deter primates from field crops on commercial farms. To address this knowledge gap and identify some mitigation strategies, we used direct observation from a hide to collect behaviors and interspecific interactions between chacma baboons (Papio ursinus; baboons) and vervet monkeys (Chlorocebus pygerythrus; vervets) foraging in a 1-ha butternut squash (Cucurbita moschata) field for 4 months (May to August) in 2013 on a 564-ha commercial farm in the Blouberg District of South Africa. Baboons caused the most crop damage, foraged on crops more in the mornings, and their rates of crop foraging were influenced primarily by natural vegetation productivity. Vervet monkey rates of crop foraging were primarily influenced by the presence of baboons. When baboons or vervets visited the farm, half of the visits did not involve crop foraging, and vervets were more likely to crop forage when they visited than baboons. Based on this preliminary study, we make recommendations for crop farmers to improve the effectiveness of current deterrent methods. These include increasing deterrent efforts when natural vegetation drops below a normalized difference vegetation index value of 0.32, especially during the hours before midday, chasing baboons and vervets farther from the farm rather than just out of crop fields, and increasing the perceived mortality risk of field guards. These recommendations should be evaluated to determine effectiveness before being adopted on a wider scale.","PeriodicalId":13095,"journal":{"name":"Human–Wildlife Interactions","volume":"31 1","pages":"19"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"74958240","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The impact of wildlife–vehicle collisions on drivers and wildlife populations has been gaining attention in the United States. Given the established success of wildlife crossings with fencing in reducing wildlife crashes and connecting habitat, information is needed on cost-effective means of implementation for departments of transportation. When wildlife crossings are constructed, they are often built into new road projects as a series of 2 or more underpasses and/or overpass structures connected by exclusionary fencing. Given limited transportation budgets and the prevalence of maintenance activities more so than new construction in many states, enhancing existing underpasses on previously constructed roads has been recognized as a cost-effective mitigation opportunity. More research is needed, however, on the effects of adding fencing to existing underpasses, particularly those that are too far from one another to be connected with contiguous fencing. In this study, we evaluated the effectiveness of this measure when applied to isolated underpasses. Approximately 1.6 km of 2.4-m-high wildlife fencing was added to each of 2 existing underpasses, a large bridge underpass and a large box culvert, situated approximately 8 km apart from one another on Interstate 64 in Virginia, USA. We conducted a 2-year post-fencing camera monitoring study and compared the findings from a 2-year pre-fencing study with regard to collision frequencies with white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) and black bears (Ursus americanus); the use of the underpasses by wildlife; and roadside deer activity. We also evaluated deer activity data to compare different fence end designs applied at the study sites. After fencing installation, deer–vehicle collisions (DVCs) were reduced by 96.5% and 88% at the box culvert and bridge underpass, respectively, and there were no increases in DVCs within 1.6 km of the fence ends. Deer crossings increased 410% at the box culvert and 71% at the bridge underpass. Use of the culvert and bridge underpasses by other mammals increased 81% and 165%, respectively. Although deer use of the underpasses was much greater than their activity at any of the fence ends, there was relatively high deer activity at the fence ends that did not tie into a feature such as right-of-way fencing. Our study found that the addition of wildlife fencing to certain existing isolated underpasses can be a highly cost-effective means of increasing driver safety and enhancing habitat connectivity for wildlife. The benefits from crash reduction exceeded the fencing costs in 1.8 years, and fencing resulted in an average saving of >$2.3 million per site over the 25-year lifetime of the fencing. The results add to the growing body of knowledge about effective ways we can use existing infrastructure to connect wildlife habitat and increase driver safety.
{"title":"Enhancing Existing Isolated Underpasses with Fencing Reduces Wildlife Crashes and Connects Habitat","authors":"B. Donaldson, Kaitlyn E. M. Elliott","doi":"10.26077/433F-0FDF","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.26077/433F-0FDF","url":null,"abstract":"The impact of wildlife–vehicle collisions on drivers and wildlife populations has been gaining attention in the United States. Given the established success of wildlife crossings with fencing in reducing wildlife crashes and connecting habitat, information is needed on cost-effective means of implementation for departments of transportation. When wildlife crossings are constructed, they are often built into new road projects as a series of 2 or more underpasses and/or overpass structures connected by exclusionary fencing. Given limited transportation budgets and the prevalence of maintenance activities more so than new construction in many states, enhancing existing underpasses on previously constructed roads has been recognized as a cost-effective mitigation opportunity. More research is needed, however, on the effects of adding fencing to existing underpasses, particularly those that are too far from one another to be connected with contiguous fencing. In this study, we evaluated the effectiveness of this measure when applied to isolated underpasses. Approximately 1.6 km of 2.4-m-high wildlife fencing was added to each of 2 existing underpasses, a large bridge underpass and a large box culvert, situated approximately 8 km apart from one another on Interstate 64 in Virginia, USA. We conducted a 2-year post-fencing camera monitoring study and compared the findings from a 2-year pre-fencing study with regard to collision frequencies with white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) and black bears (Ursus americanus); the use of the underpasses by wildlife; and roadside deer activity. We also evaluated deer activity data to compare different fence end designs applied at the study sites. After fencing installation, deer–vehicle collisions (DVCs) were reduced by 96.5% and 88% at the box culvert and bridge underpass, respectively, and there were no increases in DVCs within 1.6 km of the fence ends. Deer crossings increased 410% at the box culvert and 71% at the bridge underpass. Use of the culvert and bridge underpasses by other mammals increased 81% and 165%, respectively. Although deer use of the underpasses was much greater than their activity at any of the fence ends, there was relatively high deer activity at the fence ends that did not tie into a feature such as right-of-way fencing. Our study found that the addition of wildlife fencing to certain existing isolated underpasses can be a highly cost-effective means of increasing driver safety and enhancing habitat connectivity for wildlife. The benefits from crash reduction exceeded the fencing costs in 1.8 years, and fencing resulted in an average saving of >$2.3 million per site over the 25-year lifetime of the fencing. The results add to the growing body of knowledge about effective ways we can use existing infrastructure to connect wildlife habitat and increase driver safety.","PeriodicalId":13095,"journal":{"name":"Human–Wildlife Interactions","volume":"72 8","pages":"20"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"72537848","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Populations of wild boar and feral pigs (Sus scrofa) are increasing in numbers and distribution worldwide, in parallel with their significant environmental and economic impact. Reliable methods to detect the presence of this species are needed for monitoring its natural range expansion and its occurrence in areas where animals have been deliberately or accidentally introduced. The main aim of this study, carried out in English woodlands recently colonized by wild boar, was to assess the effectiveness of a birch wood tar-based compound, to detect the presence of this species in presence/absence surveys. A pilot trial in woodlands where wild boar had been established for circa 20 years found that wild boar sniffed and rubbed their bodies against stakes treated with this compound significantly more than against control stakes treated with water, thus confirming that the birch wood tar attracted wild boar to stakes. A second trial, carried out by applying the birch wood tar to trees in 8 woodlands surrounding the core range of wild boar, found that these animals left consistently more activity signs such as rubbing, tusk marks, and rooting on or around trees treated with this compound than on or around control trees treated with water. These results suggest that birch wood tar can be used as a method to confirm presence of wild boar in an area. Possible applications of this compound include its use to increase trapping efficiency or its deployment to confirm the success of a local eradication.
{"title":"A Novel Method for Detecting Wild Boar Presence","authors":"G. Massei, D. Cowan, J. Coats","doi":"10.26077/168B-A33C","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.26077/168B-A33C","url":null,"abstract":"Populations of wild boar and feral pigs (Sus scrofa) are increasing in numbers and distribution worldwide, in parallel with their significant environmental and economic impact. Reliable methods to detect the presence of this species are needed for monitoring its natural range expansion and its occurrence in areas where animals have been deliberately or accidentally introduced. The main aim of this study, carried out in English woodlands recently colonized by wild boar, was to assess the effectiveness of a birch wood tar-based compound, to detect the presence of this species in presence/absence surveys. A pilot trial in woodlands where wild boar had been established for circa 20 years found that wild boar sniffed and rubbed their bodies against stakes treated with this compound significantly more than against control stakes treated with water, thus confirming that the birch wood tar attracted wild boar to stakes. A second trial, carried out by applying the birch wood tar to trees in 8 woodlands surrounding the core range of wild boar, found that these animals left consistently more activity signs such as rubbing, tusk marks, and rooting on or around trees treated with this compound than on or around control trees treated with water. These results suggest that birch wood tar can be used as a method to confirm presence of wild boar in an area. Possible applications of this compound include its use to increase trapping efficiency or its deployment to confirm the success of a local eradication.","PeriodicalId":13095,"journal":{"name":"Human–Wildlife Interactions","volume":"113 1","pages":"14"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"80640156","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
R. Baldwin, T. Becchetti, Niamh M. Quinn, Ryan Meinerz
Visual counts are frequently used to assess efficacy of management tools for ground squirrels (Marmotini), but the effectiveness of this approach has not been assessed for many ground squirrel species including California ground squirrels (Otospermophilus spp.). As such, we used visual counts of California ground squirrels to determine the efficacy of diphacinonetreated oat groat applications in rangelands in central California, USA, and compared those results to efficacy values derived from the use of radio-collared ground squirrels in the same plots. We also used location data of radio-collared ground squirrels to explore the size of buffer zone needed around census plots to provide an accurate assessment of efficacy when using visual counts. We did not observe a difference in efficacy associated with the 2 monitoring strategies, indicating that visual counts are an effective monitoring tool for ground squirrels. We observed low efficacy in 2 treatment plots, likely due to low usage of those plots by ground squirrels. Increasing the size of buffer zones would increase the usage of treatment areas by the target population and would help to minimize reinvasion by adjacent ground squirrel populations, which could bias efficacy values low. We suggest a minimum of a 61-m buffer surrounding census plots. Increasing to 66 m or more would further benefit efficacy assessments, but increased size of the buffer zone must be balanced with greater costs and regulatory constraints.
{"title":"Utility of Visual Counts for Determining Efficacy of Management Tools for California Ground Squirrels","authors":"R. Baldwin, T. Becchetti, Niamh M. Quinn, Ryan Meinerz","doi":"10.26077/1D43-FBEA","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.26077/1D43-FBEA","url":null,"abstract":"Visual counts are frequently used to assess efficacy of management tools for ground squirrels (Marmotini), but the effectiveness of this approach has not been assessed for many ground squirrel species including California ground squirrels (Otospermophilus spp.). As such, we used visual counts of California ground squirrels to determine the efficacy of diphacinonetreated oat groat applications in rangelands in central California, USA, and compared those results to efficacy values derived from the use of radio-collared ground squirrels in the same plots. We also used location data of radio-collared ground squirrels to explore the size of buffer zone needed around census plots to provide an accurate assessment of efficacy when using visual counts. We did not observe a difference in efficacy associated with the 2 monitoring strategies, indicating that visual counts are an effective monitoring tool for ground squirrels. We observed low efficacy in 2 treatment plots, likely due to low usage of those plots by ground squirrels. Increasing the size of buffer zones would increase the usage of treatment areas by the target population and would help to minimize reinvasion by adjacent ground squirrel populations, which could bias efficacy values low. We suggest a minimum of a 61-m buffer surrounding census plots. Increasing to 66 m or more would further benefit efficacy assessments, but increased size of the buffer zone must be balanced with greater costs and regulatory constraints.","PeriodicalId":13095,"journal":{"name":"Human–Wildlife Interactions","volume":"99 1","pages":"19"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"79258665","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Justin A. Dellinger, D. Macon, Jaime L. Rudd, D. Clifford, S. Torres
.
．
{"title":"Temporal Trends and Drivers of Mountain Lion Depredation in California, USA","authors":"Justin A. Dellinger, D. Macon, Jaime L. Rudd, D. Clifford, S. Torres","doi":"10.26077/C5BB-DE20","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.26077/C5BB-DE20","url":null,"abstract":".","PeriodicalId":13095,"journal":{"name":"Human–Wildlife Interactions","volume":"66 1","pages":"21"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"90672293","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Wild boar (Sus scrofa) populations in Central Europe have been growing longterm, and damages to crops and forests where boars damage freshly planted tree seedlings are growing too. In addition to having a significant economic impact, these damages worsen the prospect of successful restoration of bare land. This study presents an analysis of damage to tree seedling plantations caused by wild boar in the Czech Republic. We used data from an extensive questionnaire survey among forest owners, our own survey of the extent of damage in model areas, and experiments in locations with a large boar population. Damage to plantings is a widespread phenomenon, and up to 80% of planted trees may be damaged in heavily affected locations. The wild boar does not differentiate between bareroot or containerized seedlings or tree species. Trees were often simply pulled out, without any traces of damage to the root system. Wild boar preferences were not affected by the composition of the substrate of containerized seedlings. Seedlings were damaged most often during the 4 weeks after planting; after this period, the risk of damage fell considerably. Based on the obtained data, we estimated that the damage caused by wild boar rooting out seedlings in 2019 throughout the Czech Republic amounted to $3,199,200 USD, which is equivalent to $122 USD per km2 of forest land. As we are not currently aware of any method of protection against this damage, the most expedient solution seems to be the reduction of the wild boar population, as well as to monitor and protect freshly established cultures, for a period of at least 4 weeks after planting.
{"title":"Evaluation of Damage to Forest Tree Plantations by Wild Boar in the Czech Republic","authors":"Vlastimil Skoták, Jakub Drimaj, J. Kamler","doi":"10.26077/109A-E424","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.26077/109A-E424","url":null,"abstract":"Wild boar (Sus scrofa) populations in Central Europe have been growing longterm, and damages to crops and forests where boars damage freshly planted tree seedlings are growing too. In addition to having a significant economic impact, these damages worsen the prospect of successful restoration of bare land. This study presents an analysis of damage to tree seedling plantations caused by wild boar in the Czech Republic. We used data from an extensive questionnaire survey among forest owners, our own survey of the extent of damage in model areas, and experiments in locations with a large boar population. Damage to plantings is a widespread phenomenon, and up to 80% of planted trees may be damaged in heavily affected locations. The wild boar does not differentiate between bareroot or containerized seedlings or tree species. Trees were often simply pulled out, without any traces of damage to the root system. Wild boar preferences were not affected by the composition of the substrate of containerized seedlings. Seedlings were damaged most often during the 4 weeks after planting; after this period, the risk of damage fell considerably. Based on the obtained data, we estimated that the damage caused by wild boar rooting out seedlings in 2019 throughout the Czech Republic amounted to $3,199,200 USD, which is equivalent to $122 USD per km2 of forest land. As we are not currently aware of any method of protection against this damage, the most expedient solution seems to be the reduction of the wild boar population, as well as to monitor and protect freshly established cultures, for a period of at least 4 weeks after planting.","PeriodicalId":13095,"journal":{"name":"Human–Wildlife Interactions","volume":"3 1","pages":"13"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"72970854","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Does Hunting Affect the Behavior of Wild Pigs","authors":"O. Keuling, G. Massei","doi":"10.26077/3A83-9155","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.26077/3A83-9155","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":13095,"journal":{"name":"Human–Wildlife Interactions","volume":"47 1","pages":"11"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"82663569","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：