4.7 Article

Effects of hunting with hounds on a non-target species living on the edge of a protected area

期刊

BIOLOGICAL CONSERVATION
卷 144, 期 1, 页码 641-649

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.biocon.2010.10.022

关键词

Roe deer; Hunting techniques; Protected area; Hunting with hounds; Conservation policies; Reserve effect

资金

  1. Regione Toscana
  2. Provincia di Arezzo
  3. MIPAF
  4. Italian Ministry for the University and Research

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The impact of hunting on wildlife is a complex phenomenon which varies in space and across time, and yet limited knowledge is available on it. This is especially the case of the indirect effects of hunting on the behaviour of target as well as non-target species. Here we analyze how hunting affected the spatial behaviour of 62 radiocollared roe deer (Capreolus capreolus) in a protected area adjacent to areas where hunting with hounds (target species: wild boar and hares) and stalking with rifles from high seats without dogs (target species: roe deer) were permitted during the hunting season. Our results showed that hunting caused a significant increase in the home range size of monitored deer, as well as a reserve effect, whereby roe deer used the protected area as a refuge from hunters. These behavioural responses were significant only at times when hunting with hounds was conducted, even though roe deer was not the target species of this technique. Reactions to the perceived risk of predation varied among age and sex classes, with yearling being more sensitive and using the protected area more than adults. As shown in our study, hunting harassment provoked by drives with hounds significantly affects the behaviour of non-target species. Therefore, the use of long-legged hounds represents a variable that should be carefully evaluated by wildlife managers in their management plans and conservation policies, especially when endangered or vulnerable species are present. (C) 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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

4.7
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