4.1 Review

Interactions between ungulates, forests, and supplementary feeding: the role of nutritional balancing in determining outcomes

Journal

MAMMAL RESEARCH
Volume 62, Issue 1, Pages 1-7

Publisher

SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
DOI: 10.1007/s13364-016-0301-1

Keywords

Sweden; Alces alces; Moose; Supplementary feeding; Browsing; Forest damage; Animal health; Wildlife

Categories

Funding

  1. Stiftelsen Skogsallskapet [1011-79/150-7 HJHIL]
  2. Swedish Environment Protection Agency [NV-01740-14]
  3. Sodra Skogsagarnas Stiftelse for Forskning, Utveckling och Utbildning
  4. Future Forests - Foundation for Strategic Environmental Research (MISTRA)
  5. Swedish Environment Protection Agency (program Beyond Moose) [NV-01337-15]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

People provide wild ungulates with large quantities of supplementary feed to improve their health and survival and reduce forest damage. Whereas supplementary feeding can positively affect the winter survival of ungulates and short-term hunting success, some of the feeds provided may actually reduce ungulate health and increase forest damage. Here, we highlight how recent advances in ungulate nutritional ecology can help explain why supplementary feeding can lead to undesirable outcomes. Using Europe's largest cervid, the moose (Alces alces), as a model species, and Sweden, as the socio-ecological context, we explain the concept of nutritional balancing and its relevance to supplementary feeding. Nutritional balancing refers to how animals alter their food intake to achieve a specific nutritional target balance in their diet, by selecting balanced food items or by combining items with nutritional compositions that are complimentary. As the most common supplementary feeds used contain higher concentrations of non-structural carbohydrates than the ungulates' normal winter diet, the consumption of such feeds may cause animals to increase their intake of woody browse, and thereby exacerbate forest damage. We also explain how animal health may be negatively affected by large intakes of such feed if complementary browse items are not available. We therefore suggest that the use of inappropriate feed is an additional means by which supplementary feeding may result in negative outcomes for hunters, forest owners, and wild animals.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available