{"title":"澳大利亚飞狐营地的分散尝试回顾","authors":"B. Roberts, M. Mo, M. Roache, P. Eby","doi":"10.1071/ZO20043","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The permanent exclusion of flying-foxes from camps (camp dispersal) near human settlements is a management tool commonly used to mitigate human–wildlife conflict. We summarised information on the costs and outcomes of 48 camp dispersals in Australia. Our aim was to improve the information base on which camp management decisions are made. Camp dispersals were largely triggered by impacts on neighbouring residents (75%). A disproportionately high number occurred in 2013–14, associated with changes in Queensland flying-fox management policy following an increase in the number of urban camps. Repeat actions over months or years were typically required to exclude flying-foxes from camps (58%). In 88% of cases, replacement camps formed within 1 km and became sites of transferred conflict. Only 23% of dispersal attempts were successful in resolving conflict for communities, generally after extensive destruction of roost habitat. Costs were poorly documented, although no dispersal attempt costing less than AU$250 000 proved successful. We conclude that camp dispersal is a high-risk, high-cost tool for mitigating human–wildlife conflict, in situ management strategies and tools should be developed, evidence-based information on management options should be made available to stakeholders via a nationally curated resource library, and research is required on impacts of camp management practices on flying-foxes.","PeriodicalId":55420,"journal":{"name":"Australian Journal of Zoology","volume":"9 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Review of dispersal attempts at flying-fox camps in Australia\",\"authors\":\"B. Roberts, M. Mo, M. Roache, P. Eby\",\"doi\":\"10.1071/ZO20043\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The permanent exclusion of flying-foxes from camps (camp dispersal) near human settlements is a management tool commonly used to mitigate human–wildlife conflict. We summarised information on the costs and outcomes of 48 camp dispersals in Australia. Our aim was to improve the information base on which camp management decisions are made. Camp dispersals were largely triggered by impacts on neighbouring residents (75%). A disproportionately high number occurred in 2013–14, associated with changes in Queensland flying-fox management policy following an increase in the number of urban camps. Repeat actions over months or years were typically required to exclude flying-foxes from camps (58%). In 88% of cases, replacement camps formed within 1 km and became sites of transferred conflict. Only 23% of dispersal attempts were successful in resolving conflict for communities, generally after extensive destruction of roost habitat. Costs were poorly documented, although no dispersal attempt costing less than AU$250 000 proved successful. We conclude that camp dispersal is a high-risk, high-cost tool for mitigating human–wildlife conflict, in situ management strategies and tools should be developed, evidence-based information on management options should be made available to stakeholders via a nationally curated resource library, and research is required on impacts of camp management practices on flying-foxes.\",\"PeriodicalId\":55420,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Australian Journal of Zoology\",\"volume\":\"9 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Australian Journal of Zoology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"99\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1071/ZO20043\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"生物学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ZOOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Australian Journal of Zoology","FirstCategoryId":"99","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1071/ZO20043","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ZOOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Review of dispersal attempts at flying-fox camps in Australia
The permanent exclusion of flying-foxes from camps (camp dispersal) near human settlements is a management tool commonly used to mitigate human–wildlife conflict. We summarised information on the costs and outcomes of 48 camp dispersals in Australia. Our aim was to improve the information base on which camp management decisions are made. Camp dispersals were largely triggered by impacts on neighbouring residents (75%). A disproportionately high number occurred in 2013–14, associated with changes in Queensland flying-fox management policy following an increase in the number of urban camps. Repeat actions over months or years were typically required to exclude flying-foxes from camps (58%). In 88% of cases, replacement camps formed within 1 km and became sites of transferred conflict. Only 23% of dispersal attempts were successful in resolving conflict for communities, generally after extensive destruction of roost habitat. Costs were poorly documented, although no dispersal attempt costing less than AU$250 000 proved successful. We conclude that camp dispersal is a high-risk, high-cost tool for mitigating human–wildlife conflict, in situ management strategies and tools should be developed, evidence-based information on management options should be made available to stakeholders via a nationally curated resource library, and research is required on impacts of camp management practices on flying-foxes.
期刊介绍:
Australian Journal of Zoology is an international journal publishing contributions on evolutionary, molecular and comparative zoology. The journal focuses on Australasian fauna but also includes high-quality research from any region that has broader practical or theoretical relevance or that demonstrates a conceptual advance to any aspect of zoology. Subject areas include, but are not limited to: anatomy, physiology, molecular biology, genetics, reproductive biology, developmental biology, parasitology, morphology, behaviour, ecology, zoogeography, systematics and evolution.
Australian Journal of Zoology is a valuable resource for professional zoologists, research scientists, resource managers, environmental consultants, students and amateurs interested in any aspect of the scientific study of animals.
Australian Journal of Zoology is published with the endorsement of the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO) and the Australian Academy of Science.