4.3 Article

Restricted-area culls and red fox abundance: Are effects a matter of time and place?

期刊

CONSERVATION SCIENCE AND PRACTICE
卷 1, 期 11, 页码 -

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/csp2.115

关键词

camera trap; capercaillie; conservation hunting; grouse; mesopredator; population density; population regulation; predator control; wildlife management

资金

  1. State Ministry of Rural Affairs and Consumer Protection (MLR Baden-Wurttemberg
  2. Germany)
  3. Open Access Publishing Fund of the German Science Foundation (DFG)
  4. University of Freiburg

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Predators are often culled to benefit prey, but in many cases this conservation goal is not achieved or results remain unknown. The red fox (Vulpes vulpes) is a predator of global significance, and an invasive species in some regions. Red fox culls intended to benefit prey are often restricted to small areas, and effectiveness is rarely sufficiently evaluated. Given the economic, ecological, social, and welfare issues associated with lethal predator control, there is a strong need to assess the effects of spatiotemporal variation in culling intensity on red fox abundance. We surveyed red fox populations in fragmented forests of south-western Germany and related indices of local fox abundance to culling data, predicted landscape-scale fox abundance, and other covariates. We tested whether restricted-area culling was associated with local reductions in fox abundance, and examined how this relationship changed over time. Local fox abundance was temporarily reduced in spring, following winter culls. However, the effect was minor and fox populations had compensated for the reductions at the latest by autumn. Restricted-area culling therefore likely failed to sustain effects on fox abundance throughout the period most relevant for conservation (i.e., the reproductive period of the target prey species). To be effective as a conservation tool, culling will therefore require explicit spatiotemporal coordination matching the biology of predators and target prey.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据