P. Söderquist, J. Elmberg, Daniel Einarson, G. Gunnarsson
Releasing farmed mallards into the wild is a common practice in wildlife management worldwide, involving millions of birds annually, and is mainly carried out to increase hunting opportunities. Ringing and previous research show that released mallards have low survival also outside the hunting season, and that survivors may compromise migration habits, morphology, and adaptations of the wild population. Detailed local movements of released mallards have not been studied before, despite the importance of spatiotemporal patterns for understanding the impact of releases and their utility for hunting. We studied local movements in August–October of 11 wild and 44 released mallards caught in the same wetland in southern Sweden and provided with GPS tags. Wild mallards moved longer distances than farmed, over the whole diel cycle, as well as during three out of four separate periods of the day (dawn, day, and dusk). Mallards of both origins moved the longest distances during dusk and dawn, and the shortest during the night. Males and females did not differ significantly in distance moved, regardless of origin (wild versus farmed). Our study demonstrates large differences in spatiotemporal movement patterns between wild and farmed mallards. The typical day of wild mallards included movements between wetlands in the landscape, likely to foraging sites known from previous experience. However, wild mallards frequently returned to the study wetland, probably attracted by supplementary bait. On the other hand, farmed mallards seldom left the study wetland, despite the possibility of accompanying wild birds to other sites. The sedentary behavior of farmed mallards and the fact that wild birds come to join them are both beneficial for hunting purposes. Limited movements of farmed mallards, together with their low survival, could also be positive as they limit hybridization between wild and farmed mallards, as well as dispersal of nutrients.
{"title":"Local movements of farmed‐released versus wild mallards Anas platyrhynchos in fall","authors":"P. Söderquist, J. Elmberg, Daniel Einarson, G. Gunnarsson","doi":"10.1002/wlb3.01259","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/wlb3.01259","url":null,"abstract":"Releasing farmed mallards into the wild is a common practice in wildlife management worldwide, involving millions of birds annually, and is mainly carried out to increase hunting opportunities. Ringing and previous research show that released mallards have low survival also outside the hunting season, and that survivors may compromise migration habits, morphology, and adaptations of the wild population. Detailed local movements of released mallards have not been studied before, despite the importance of spatiotemporal patterns for understanding the impact of releases and their utility for hunting. We studied local movements in August–October of 11 wild and 44 released mallards caught in the same wetland in southern Sweden and provided with GPS tags. Wild mallards moved longer distances than farmed, over the whole diel cycle, as well as during three out of four separate periods of the day (dawn, day, and dusk). Mallards of both origins moved the longest distances during dusk and dawn, and the shortest during the night. Males and females did not differ significantly in distance moved, regardless of origin (wild versus farmed). Our study demonstrates large differences in spatiotemporal movement patterns between wild and farmed mallards. The typical day of wild mallards included movements between wetlands in the landscape, likely to foraging sites known from previous experience. However, wild mallards frequently returned to the study wetland, probably attracted by supplementary bait. On the other hand, farmed mallards seldom left the study wetland, despite the possibility of accompanying wild birds to other sites. The sedentary behavior of farmed mallards and the fact that wild birds come to join them are both beneficial for hunting purposes. Limited movements of farmed mallards, together with their low survival, could also be positive as they limit hybridization between wild and farmed mallards, as well as dispersal of nutrients.","PeriodicalId":54405,"journal":{"name":"Wildlife Biology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.9,"publicationDate":"2024-02-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140425234","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Electric wire enclosures to protect livestock represent one intervention to mitigate negative impacts of large carnivores. However, appropriate fence construction and voltage level in the live wires are crucial to deter carnivores. To ensure that the voltage level remains sufficiently high, maintenances and clearing the wires from tall or growing vegetation is regularly needed. In this study, we investigate the performance of a fence wire coated with conductive rubber, claimed by the supplier not to short circuit and drop in voltage due to contact with e.g. ground and vegetation. We examine the voltage of the rubber‐coated wire during contact with soil, ground, and wet vegetation and observed a voltage loss comparable to that of the standard metal fence wire. Our results imply that the rubber‐coated wire does not perform better than a conventional metal fence wire when in contact with growing grass and other elements that usually short circuit an electric fence.
{"title":"No benefit in using rubber‐coated wire to counter loss of voltage due to tall grass in large carnivore deterring fences","authors":"Eva Hedmark, Carlos Cardoso Palacios, Jens Frank","doi":"10.1002/wlb3.01142","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/wlb3.01142","url":null,"abstract":"Electric wire enclosures to protect livestock represent one intervention to mitigate negative impacts of large carnivores. However, appropriate fence construction and voltage level in the live wires are crucial to deter carnivores. To ensure that the voltage level remains sufficiently high, maintenances and clearing the wires from tall or growing vegetation is regularly needed. In this study, we investigate the performance of a fence wire coated with conductive rubber, claimed by the supplier not to short circuit and drop in voltage due to contact with e.g. ground and vegetation. We examine the voltage of the rubber‐coated wire during contact with soil, ground, and wet vegetation and observed a voltage loss comparable to that of the standard metal fence wire. Our results imply that the rubber‐coated wire does not perform better than a conventional metal fence wire when in contact with growing grass and other elements that usually short circuit an electric fence.","PeriodicalId":54405,"journal":{"name":"Wildlife Biology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.9,"publicationDate":"2024-02-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140448876","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Rufus Sage, Maureen Woodburn, Sam McCready, Jenny Coomes
The cause of recent population declines in some farmland/hedgerow breeding bird species in the UK is related to a lack of cover and food resources in winter. In improved grassland areas some of those declines have been particularly acute and some have been shown to be related to the availability of grass and weed seed in winter. The provision of seed‐bearing crops as part of AES options has been shown to benefit some of these birds. Game crop plots sown on shooting estates for holding and driving gamebirds in autumn and winter have been shown to hold relatively high densities of farmland and wood‐edge birds during the winter.We studied breeding songbirds in hedges in a primarily improved grassland area in the SW of England where there are some large shooting estates that sow relatively large game crop plots (1–5 ha) in the landscape. In this study we found that otherwise similar hedges in terms of size and density near to those winter game crop plots, had between 1.5 and 2 times as many breeding resident songbirds per unit length the following spring compared to hedges further away from game crop plots. This was despite game management in these plots being wound down during February and in many cases, the crops themselves being removed by mid‐March. Hedges within approximately 350 m from game crop plots had more breeding birds. We discuss possible mechanisms and suggest that some passerines preferentially establish breeding territories in hedges near to game crops in late winter. We suggest how to distribute game crop plots to maximise any benefit in an improved grassland landscape.
{"title":"Winter game crop plots for gamebirds retain hedgerow breeding songbirds in an improved grassland landscape","authors":"Rufus Sage, Maureen Woodburn, Sam McCready, Jenny Coomes","doi":"10.1002/wlb3.01156","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/wlb3.01156","url":null,"abstract":"The cause of recent population declines in some farmland/hedgerow breeding bird species in the UK is related to a lack of cover and food resources in winter. In improved grassland areas some of those declines have been particularly acute and some have been shown to be related to the availability of grass and weed seed in winter. The provision of seed‐bearing crops as part of AES options has been shown to benefit some of these birds. Game crop plots sown on shooting estates for holding and driving gamebirds in autumn and winter have been shown to hold relatively high densities of farmland and wood‐edge birds during the winter.We studied breeding songbirds in hedges in a primarily improved grassland area in the SW of England where there are some large shooting estates that sow relatively large game crop plots (1–5 ha) in the landscape. In this study we found that otherwise similar hedges in terms of size and density near to those winter game crop plots, had between 1.5 and 2 times as many breeding resident songbirds per unit length the following spring compared to hedges further away from game crop plots. This was despite game management in these plots being wound down during February and in many cases, the crops themselves being removed by mid‐March. Hedges within approximately 350 m from game crop plots had more breeding birds. We discuss possible mechanisms and suggest that some passerines preferentially establish breeding territories in hedges near to game crops in late winter. We suggest how to distribute game crop plots to maximise any benefit in an improved grassland landscape.","PeriodicalId":54405,"journal":{"name":"Wildlife Biology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.9,"publicationDate":"2024-02-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140446060","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Robert Moss, Fiona Leckie, Sorrel Jones, K. Kortland
Wild vertebrates usually avoid ground disturbed by humans with uncertain effects on their distribution and density. We report on a natural experiment that confirms and extends previous conclusions about how the local distribution of capercaillie is affected by track‐based disturbance. We surveyed the birds' droppings in two periods, before and after a predicted increase in disturbance adjacent to an expanding Scottish village, and model the probability of finding droppings in relation to period plus two disturbance gradients – distance to a much disturbed ‘entry zone' with a high density of tracks lying adjacent to the village, plus distance to the nearest track. Throughout the study, no droppings were found within the entry zone and their density was depressed up to 400 m from it. Density of droppings was also depressed within 100–120 m of tracks but, compared to a notional scenario without tracks, was threefold greater on ground 120–250 m from tracks. Although the number of cocks counted at the lek in spring showed a small increase, there was an almost threefold decline in the probability of finding capercaillie droppings on and within about 40 m of tracks. We infer that, after the development, birds were less likely to use or cross tracks in pursuit of their daily living requirements, with unknown consequences for their population dynamics and vital rates. Our results have implications for refuge design. Birds on roughly half of a 50 ha refuge should be undisturbed by direct effects of track‐based activities. However, birds shifting away from tracks may themselves cause local increases in density and associated, indirect disturbance such that a refuge would need to be over 300 ha to keep half of it undisturbed.
{"title":"Disturbance‐related redistribution of western capercaillie Tetrao urogallus away from woodland tracks","authors":"Robert Moss, Fiona Leckie, Sorrel Jones, K. Kortland","doi":"10.1002/wlb3.01151","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/wlb3.01151","url":null,"abstract":"Wild vertebrates usually avoid ground disturbed by humans with uncertain effects on their distribution and density. We report on a natural experiment that confirms and extends previous conclusions about how the local distribution of capercaillie is affected by track‐based disturbance. We surveyed the birds' droppings in two periods, before and after a predicted increase in disturbance adjacent to an expanding Scottish village, and model the probability of finding droppings in relation to period plus two disturbance gradients – distance to a much disturbed ‘entry zone' with a high density of tracks lying adjacent to the village, plus distance to the nearest track. Throughout the study, no droppings were found within the entry zone and their density was depressed up to 400 m from it. Density of droppings was also depressed within 100–120 m of tracks but, compared to a notional scenario without tracks, was threefold greater on ground 120–250 m from tracks. Although the number of cocks counted at the lek in spring showed a small increase, there was an almost threefold decline in the probability of finding capercaillie droppings on and within about 40 m of tracks. We infer that, after the development, birds were less likely to use or cross tracks in pursuit of their daily living requirements, with unknown consequences for their population dynamics and vital rates. Our results have implications for refuge design. Birds on roughly half of a 50 ha refuge should be undisturbed by direct effects of track‐based activities. However, birds shifting away from tracks may themselves cause local increases in density and associated, indirect disturbance such that a refuge would need to be over 300 ha to keep half of it undisturbed.","PeriodicalId":54405,"journal":{"name":"Wildlife Biology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.9,"publicationDate":"2024-02-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140447493","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Fences are an important tool for anchoring reintroduced species to a target area, and there is a need to understand their effect on other wildlife species. However, little is understood about the response of wildlife to newly constructed fences over time. We evaluated fences used in the reintroduction of plains bison Bison bison to Banff National Park, Canada. These fences were designed to contain reintroduced bison while allowing for the free passage of other wildlife. In 2020, we provided an assessment of the permeability of several fence designs. Here, we investigated longer‐term fence effects and addressed the emerging question of whether wildlife adapt their behaviours to navigate fences more effectively over time. We used an expanded array of remote cameras and a before‐after‐control‐impact design to evaluate changes in detection probability for 12 species. Next, we tested for changes in crossing rates and travel speeds of migratory elk Cervus canadensis using 22 years of GPS collar data. Finally, we examined whether species detections or elk movements changed over time after fences were constructed. Changes in detection probability near fences were inconsistent between species. Elk fence crossing rates decreased after fence construction, and travel speeds slowed by a negligible amount. However, these effects were temporary – wildlife learned to cross fences more efficiently over time. Elk movement metrics followed a non‐linear pattern after the appearance of fences and began returning to pre‐fence states after approximately two years. Our study provides new information on the implementation of fences for conservation objectives while minimizing impacts on sympatric wildlife.
{"title":"A follow‐up assessment of wildlife‐permeable fences used in the reintroduction of bison","authors":"Dillon Watt, J. Whittington, K. Heuer","doi":"10.1002/wlb3.01171","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/wlb3.01171","url":null,"abstract":"Fences are an important tool for anchoring reintroduced species to a target area, and there is a need to understand their effect on other wildlife species. However, little is understood about the response of wildlife to newly constructed fences over time. We evaluated fences used in the reintroduction of plains bison Bison bison to Banff National Park, Canada. These fences were designed to contain reintroduced bison while allowing for the free passage of other wildlife. In 2020, we provided an assessment of the permeability of several fence designs. Here, we investigated longer‐term fence effects and addressed the emerging question of whether wildlife adapt their behaviours to navigate fences more effectively over time. We used an expanded array of remote cameras and a before‐after‐control‐impact design to evaluate changes in detection probability for 12 species. Next, we tested for changes in crossing rates and travel speeds of migratory elk Cervus canadensis using 22 years of GPS collar data. Finally, we examined whether species detections or elk movements changed over time after fences were constructed. Changes in detection probability near fences were inconsistent between species. Elk fence crossing rates decreased after fence construction, and travel speeds slowed by a negligible amount. However, these effects were temporary – wildlife learned to cross fences more efficiently over time. Elk movement metrics followed a non‐linear pattern after the appearance of fences and began returning to pre‐fence states after approximately two years. Our study provides new information on the implementation of fences for conservation objectives while minimizing impacts on sympatric wildlife.","PeriodicalId":54405,"journal":{"name":"Wildlife Biology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.9,"publicationDate":"2024-02-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139776178","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Lapwing are among those ground nesting bird species that suffered strong population declines following agricultural intensification in many parts of Europe. The key problem appears to be a low breeding success which, depending on the situation, may be due to predation of eggs and chicks, starvation of chicks especially during dry conditions, agricultural activities leading to direct killings, and suboptimal breeding habitat. Here, we report on a population of 40–60 lapwing breeding pairs in an intensively cultivated arable landscape in central Switzerland, where protection from farming activities, implementation of special lapwing habitat and nest fencing to exclude terrestrial predators (mainly red fox) started in 2005 and is still ongoing. Chicks were ringed and families subsequently observed every 2–3 days. Hatching success for fenced nests built before May was high. Low hatching success was observed in unfenced nests due to high predation rates and in late nests due to abandonment by the female when the vegetation was growing too tall (e.g. maize). Regularly, chicks disappeared during the night shortly after hatching. Most likely many of them first left the fence and were predated outside. Our observations from a fenced field with wet soils and puddles suggest that lapwing may produce sufficient offspring if predation can be reduced and if large enough areas with suitable habitat are available.
{"title":"Brood protection is essential but not sufficient for population survival of lapwings Vanellus vanellus in central Switzerland","authors":"P. Korner, Simon Hohl, P. Horch","doi":"10.1002/wlb3.01175","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/wlb3.01175","url":null,"abstract":"Lapwing are among those ground nesting bird species that suffered strong population declines following agricultural intensification in many parts of Europe. The key problem appears to be a low breeding success which, depending on the situation, may be due to predation of eggs and chicks, starvation of chicks especially during dry conditions, agricultural activities leading to direct killings, and suboptimal breeding habitat. Here, we report on a population of 40–60 lapwing breeding pairs in an intensively cultivated arable landscape in central Switzerland, where protection from farming activities, implementation of special lapwing habitat and nest fencing to exclude terrestrial predators (mainly red fox) started in 2005 and is still ongoing. Chicks were ringed and families subsequently observed every 2–3 days. Hatching success for fenced nests built before May was high. Low hatching success was observed in unfenced nests due to high predation rates and in late nests due to abandonment by the female when the vegetation was growing too tall (e.g. maize). Regularly, chicks disappeared during the night shortly after hatching. Most likely many of them first left the fence and were predated outside. Our observations from a fenced field with wet soils and puddles suggest that lapwing may produce sufficient offspring if predation can be reduced and if large enough areas with suitable habitat are available.","PeriodicalId":54405,"journal":{"name":"Wildlife Biology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.9,"publicationDate":"2024-02-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139776508","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Fences are an important tool for anchoring reintroduced species to a target area, and there is a need to understand their effect on other wildlife species. However, little is understood about the response of wildlife to newly constructed fences over time. We evaluated fences used in the reintroduction of plains bison Bison bison to Banff National Park, Canada. These fences were designed to contain reintroduced bison while allowing for the free passage of other wildlife. In 2020, we provided an assessment of the permeability of several fence designs. Here, we investigated longer‐term fence effects and addressed the emerging question of whether wildlife adapt their behaviours to navigate fences more effectively over time. We used an expanded array of remote cameras and a before‐after‐control‐impact design to evaluate changes in detection probability for 12 species. Next, we tested for changes in crossing rates and travel speeds of migratory elk Cervus canadensis using 22 years of GPS collar data. Finally, we examined whether species detections or elk movements changed over time after fences were constructed. Changes in detection probability near fences were inconsistent between species. Elk fence crossing rates decreased after fence construction, and travel speeds slowed by a negligible amount. However, these effects were temporary – wildlife learned to cross fences more efficiently over time. Elk movement metrics followed a non‐linear pattern after the appearance of fences and began returning to pre‐fence states after approximately two years. Our study provides new information on the implementation of fences for conservation objectives while minimizing impacts on sympatric wildlife.
{"title":"A follow‐up assessment of wildlife‐permeable fences used in the reintroduction of bison","authors":"Dillon Watt, J. Whittington, K. Heuer","doi":"10.1002/wlb3.01171","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/wlb3.01171","url":null,"abstract":"Fences are an important tool for anchoring reintroduced species to a target area, and there is a need to understand their effect on other wildlife species. However, little is understood about the response of wildlife to newly constructed fences over time. We evaluated fences used in the reintroduction of plains bison Bison bison to Banff National Park, Canada. These fences were designed to contain reintroduced bison while allowing for the free passage of other wildlife. In 2020, we provided an assessment of the permeability of several fence designs. Here, we investigated longer‐term fence effects and addressed the emerging question of whether wildlife adapt their behaviours to navigate fences more effectively over time. We used an expanded array of remote cameras and a before‐after‐control‐impact design to evaluate changes in detection probability for 12 species. Next, we tested for changes in crossing rates and travel speeds of migratory elk Cervus canadensis using 22 years of GPS collar data. Finally, we examined whether species detections or elk movements changed over time after fences were constructed. Changes in detection probability near fences were inconsistent between species. Elk fence crossing rates decreased after fence construction, and travel speeds slowed by a negligible amount. However, these effects were temporary – wildlife learned to cross fences more efficiently over time. Elk movement metrics followed a non‐linear pattern after the appearance of fences and began returning to pre‐fence states after approximately two years. Our study provides new information on the implementation of fences for conservation objectives while minimizing impacts on sympatric wildlife.","PeriodicalId":54405,"journal":{"name":"Wildlife Biology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.9,"publicationDate":"2024-02-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139835632","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Lapwing are among those ground nesting bird species that suffered strong population declines following agricultural intensification in many parts of Europe. The key problem appears to be a low breeding success which, depending on the situation, may be due to predation of eggs and chicks, starvation of chicks especially during dry conditions, agricultural activities leading to direct killings, and suboptimal breeding habitat. Here, we report on a population of 40–60 lapwing breeding pairs in an intensively cultivated arable landscape in central Switzerland, where protection from farming activities, implementation of special lapwing habitat and nest fencing to exclude terrestrial predators (mainly red fox) started in 2005 and is still ongoing. Chicks were ringed and families subsequently observed every 2–3 days. Hatching success for fenced nests built before May was high. Low hatching success was observed in unfenced nests due to high predation rates and in late nests due to abandonment by the female when the vegetation was growing too tall (e.g. maize). Regularly, chicks disappeared during the night shortly after hatching. Most likely many of them first left the fence and were predated outside. Our observations from a fenced field with wet soils and puddles suggest that lapwing may produce sufficient offspring if predation can be reduced and if large enough areas with suitable habitat are available.
{"title":"Brood protection is essential but not sufficient for population survival of lapwings Vanellus vanellus in central Switzerland","authors":"P. Korner, Simon Hohl, P. Horch","doi":"10.1002/wlb3.01175","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/wlb3.01175","url":null,"abstract":"Lapwing are among those ground nesting bird species that suffered strong population declines following agricultural intensification in many parts of Europe. The key problem appears to be a low breeding success which, depending on the situation, may be due to predation of eggs and chicks, starvation of chicks especially during dry conditions, agricultural activities leading to direct killings, and suboptimal breeding habitat. Here, we report on a population of 40–60 lapwing breeding pairs in an intensively cultivated arable landscape in central Switzerland, where protection from farming activities, implementation of special lapwing habitat and nest fencing to exclude terrestrial predators (mainly red fox) started in 2005 and is still ongoing. Chicks were ringed and families subsequently observed every 2–3 days. Hatching success for fenced nests built before May was high. Low hatching success was observed in unfenced nests due to high predation rates and in late nests due to abandonment by the female when the vegetation was growing too tall (e.g. maize). Regularly, chicks disappeared during the night shortly after hatching. Most likely many of them first left the fence and were predated outside. Our observations from a fenced field with wet soils and puddles suggest that lapwing may produce sufficient offspring if predation can be reduced and if large enough areas with suitable habitat are available.","PeriodicalId":54405,"journal":{"name":"Wildlife Biology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.9,"publicationDate":"2024-02-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139836337","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Thomas D. Gable, Sean M. Johnson‐Bice, Austin T. Homkes, Joseph K. Bump
Evaluating methods used to capture and mark neonates is necessary for ensuring research methods are ethical, follow best practices, and do not have long‐term unintended impacts on neonates or populations. We used a quasi‐experimental approach (reference versus treatment) to determine whether visiting wolf dens and marking wolf Canis lupus pups affects important wolf population metrics. Specifically, we examined whether pup recruitment and pack size differed between packs where we visited dens and handled pups (‘disturbed packs' = treatment group) and those where we did not visit dens (‘undisturbed packs' = reference group). During 2019–2023, we studied 43 wolf packs and litters, 19 of which were disturbed packs and 24 of which were undisturbed. We found no difference in recruitment or pack size between disturbed and undisturbed wolf packs. However, we did observe substantial annual variation in recruitment and pack size, which indicated that other ecological factors (e.g. prey abundance) were likely responsible for annual changes in recruitment and pack size. Our findings are consistent with several other studies, and together this research indicates that wolf dens can be visited once and wolf pups handled briefly for research purposes without having a measurable effect on recruitment and pack size.
{"title":"Single visits to active wolf dens do not impact wolf pup recruitment or pack size","authors":"Thomas D. Gable, Sean M. Johnson‐Bice, Austin T. Homkes, Joseph K. Bump","doi":"10.1002/wlb3.01195","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/wlb3.01195","url":null,"abstract":"Evaluating methods used to capture and mark neonates is necessary for ensuring research methods are ethical, follow best practices, and do not have long‐term unintended impacts on neonates or populations. We used a quasi‐experimental approach (reference versus treatment) to determine whether visiting wolf dens and marking wolf Canis lupus pups affects important wolf population metrics. Specifically, we examined whether pup recruitment and pack size differed between packs where we visited dens and handled pups (‘disturbed packs' = treatment group) and those where we did not visit dens (‘undisturbed packs' = reference group). During 2019–2023, we studied 43 wolf packs and litters, 19 of which were disturbed packs and 24 of which were undisturbed. We found no difference in recruitment or pack size between disturbed and undisturbed wolf packs. However, we did observe substantial annual variation in recruitment and pack size, which indicated that other ecological factors (e.g. prey abundance) were likely responsible for annual changes in recruitment and pack size. Our findings are consistent with several other studies, and together this research indicates that wolf dens can be visited once and wolf pups handled briefly for research purposes without having a measurable effect on recruitment and pack size.","PeriodicalId":54405,"journal":{"name":"Wildlife Biology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.9,"publicationDate":"2024-02-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139839241","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Thomas D. Gable, Sean M. Johnson‐Bice, Austin T. Homkes, Joseph K. Bump
Evaluating methods used to capture and mark neonates is necessary for ensuring research methods are ethical, follow best practices, and do not have long‐term unintended impacts on neonates or populations. We used a quasi‐experimental approach (reference versus treatment) to determine whether visiting wolf dens and marking wolf Canis lupus pups affects important wolf population metrics. Specifically, we examined whether pup recruitment and pack size differed between packs where we visited dens and handled pups (‘disturbed packs' = treatment group) and those where we did not visit dens (‘undisturbed packs' = reference group). During 2019–2023, we studied 43 wolf packs and litters, 19 of which were disturbed packs and 24 of which were undisturbed. We found no difference in recruitment or pack size between disturbed and undisturbed wolf packs. However, we did observe substantial annual variation in recruitment and pack size, which indicated that other ecological factors (e.g. prey abundance) were likely responsible for annual changes in recruitment and pack size. Our findings are consistent with several other studies, and together this research indicates that wolf dens can be visited once and wolf pups handled briefly for research purposes without having a measurable effect on recruitment and pack size.
{"title":"Single visits to active wolf dens do not impact wolf pup recruitment or pack size","authors":"Thomas D. Gable, Sean M. Johnson‐Bice, Austin T. Homkes, Joseph K. Bump","doi":"10.1002/wlb3.01195","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/wlb3.01195","url":null,"abstract":"Evaluating methods used to capture and mark neonates is necessary for ensuring research methods are ethical, follow best practices, and do not have long‐term unintended impacts on neonates or populations. We used a quasi‐experimental approach (reference versus treatment) to determine whether visiting wolf dens and marking wolf Canis lupus pups affects important wolf population metrics. Specifically, we examined whether pup recruitment and pack size differed between packs where we visited dens and handled pups (‘disturbed packs' = treatment group) and those where we did not visit dens (‘undisturbed packs' = reference group). During 2019–2023, we studied 43 wolf packs and litters, 19 of which were disturbed packs and 24 of which were undisturbed. We found no difference in recruitment or pack size between disturbed and undisturbed wolf packs. However, we did observe substantial annual variation in recruitment and pack size, which indicated that other ecological factors (e.g. prey abundance) were likely responsible for annual changes in recruitment and pack size. Our findings are consistent with several other studies, and together this research indicates that wolf dens can be visited once and wolf pups handled briefly for research purposes without having a measurable effect on recruitment and pack size.","PeriodicalId":54405,"journal":{"name":"Wildlife Biology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.9,"publicationDate":"2024-02-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139779471","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"生物学","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：