1
|
Treichler JW, VerCauteren KC, Taylor CR, Beasley JC. Changes in wild pig (Sus scrofa) relative abundance, crop damage, and environmental impacts in response to control efforts. PEST MANAGEMENT SCIENCE 2023; 79:4765-4773. [PMID: 37462084 DOI: 10.1002/ps.7671] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/26/2022] [Revised: 07/13/2023] [Accepted: 07/18/2023] [Indexed: 07/29/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND As the population and range of wild pigs (Sus scrofa) continue to grow across North America, there has been an increase in environmental and economic damages caused by this invasive species, and control efforts to reduce damages have increased concomitantly. Despite the expanding impacts and costs associated with population control of wild pigs, the extent to which wild pig control reduces populations and diminishes environmental and agricultural damages are rarely quantified. The goal of this study is to quantify changes in wild pig relative abundance and subsequent changes in damages caused by invasive wild pigs in response to control. RESULTS Using a combination of wild pig population surveys, agricultural damage assessments, and environmental rooting surveys across 19 mixed forest-agricultural properties in South Carolina, USA, we quantified changes in wild pig relative abundance and associated damages over a 3-year period following implementation of a professional control program. Following implementation of control efforts, both the number of wild pig detections and estimated abundance decreased markedly. Within 24 months relative abundance was reduced by an average of ~70%, which resulted in a corresponding decline in environmental rooting damage by ~99%. CONCLUSION Our findings suggest that sustained wild pig control efforts can substantially reduce wild pig relative abundance, which in turn resulted in a reduction in environmental rooting damage by wild pigs. Ultimately this study will help fill critical knowledge gaps regarding the efficacy of wild pig control programs and the effort needed to reduce impacts to native ecosystems, livestock, and crops. © 2023 The Authors. Pest Management Science published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Society of Chemical Industry.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Joseph W Treichler
- Savannah River Ecology Laboratory, University of Georgia, Aiken, SC, USA
- Warnell School of Forestry and Natural Resources, University of Georgia, Athens, GA, USA
| | - Kurt C VerCauteren
- United States Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, Wildlife Services, National Wildlife Research Center, Fort Collins, CO, USA
| | - Charles R Taylor
- Savannah River Ecology Laboratory, University of Georgia, Aiken, SC, USA
- Warnell School of Forestry and Natural Resources, University of Georgia, Athens, GA, USA
| | - James C Beasley
- Savannah River Ecology Laboratory, University of Georgia, Aiken, SC, USA
- Warnell School of Forestry and Natural Resources, University of Georgia, Athens, GA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Bengsen AJ, Forsyth DM, Ramsey DSL, Amos M, Brennan M, Pople AR, Comte S, Crittle T. Estimating deer density and abundance using spatial mark-resight models with camera trap data. J Mammal 2022; 103:711-722. [PMID: 35707678 PMCID: PMC9189690 DOI: 10.1093/jmammal/gyac016] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/21/2021] [Accepted: 01/28/2022] [Indexed: 11/14/2022] Open
Abstract
Globally, many wild deer populations are actively studied or managed for conservation, hunting, or damage mitigation purposes. These studies require reliable estimates of population state parameters, such as density or abundance, with a level of precision that is fit for purpose. Such estimates can be difficult to attain for many populations that occur in situations that are poorly suited to common survey methods. We evaluated the utility of combining camera trap survey data, in which a small proportion of the sample is individually recognizable using natural markings, with spatial mark-resight (SMR) models to estimate deer density in a variety of situations. We surveyed 13 deer populations comprising four deer species (Cervus unicolor, C. timorensis, C. elaphus, Dama dama) at nine widely separated sites, and used Bayesian SMR models to estimate population densities and abundances. Twelve surveys provided sufficient data for analysis and seven produced density estimates with coefficients of variation (CVs) ≤ 0.25. Estimated densities ranged from 0.3 to 24.6 deer km-2. Camera trap surveys and SMR models provided a powerful and flexible approach for estimating deer densities in populations in which many detections were not individually identifiable, and they should provide useful density estimates under a wide range of conditions that are not amenable to more widely used methods. In the absence of specific local information on deer detectability and movement patterns, we recommend that at least 30 cameras be spaced at 500-1,000 m and set for 90 days. This approach could also be applied to large mammals other than deer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Andrew J Bengsen
- NSW Department of Primary Industries, Vertebrate Pest Research Unit, 1447 Forest Road, Orange, NSW 2800, Australia
| | - David M Forsyth
- NSW Department of Primary Industries, Vertebrate Pest Research Unit, 1447 Forest Road, Orange, NSW 2800, Australia
| | - Dave S L Ramsey
- Arthur Rylah Institute for Environmental Research, Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning, 123 Brown Street, Heidelberg, VIC 3084, Australia
| | - Matt Amos
- Queensland Department of Agriculture and Fisheries, 41 Boggo Road, Dutton Park, QLD 4102, Australia
| | - Michael Brennan
- Queensland Department of Agriculture and Fisheries, 41 Boggo Road, Dutton Park, QLD 4102, Australia
| | - Anthony R Pople
- Queensland Department of Agriculture and Fisheries, 41 Boggo Road, Dutton Park, QLD 4102, Australia
| | - Sebastien Comte
- NSW Department of Primary Industries, Vertebrate Pest Research Unit, 1447 Forest Road, Orange, NSW 2800, Australia
| | - Troy Crittle
- NSW Department of Primary Industries, Biosecurity and Food Safety, 4 Marsden Park Road, Calala, NSW 2340, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Mayer JJ, Edwards TB, Garabedian JE, Kilgo JC. Sanitary Waste Landfill Effects on an Invasive Wild Pig Population. J Wildl Manage 2021. [DOI: 10.1002/jwmg.22042] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/09/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- John J. Mayer
- Savannah River National Laboratory Savannah River Nuclear Solutions LLC, Savannah River Site Bldg. 999‐W Aiken SC 29808 USA
| | - Thomas B. Edwards
- Savannah River National Laboratory Savannah River Nuclear Solutions LLC, Savannah River Site Bldg. 999‐W Aiken SC 29808 USA
| | - James E. Garabedian
- USDA Forest Service Southern Research Station P.O. Box 700 New Ellenton SC 29809 USA
| | - John C. Kilgo
- USDA Forest Service Southern Research Station P.O. Box 700 New Ellenton SC 29809 USA
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Bastille-Rousseau G, Schlichting PE, Keiter DA, Smith JB, Kilgo JC, Wittemyer G, Vercauteren KC, Beasley JC, Pepin KM. Multi-level movement response of invasive wild pigs (Sus scrofa) to removal. PEST MANAGEMENT SCIENCE 2021; 77:85-95. [PMID: 32738020 DOI: 10.1002/ps.6029] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/05/2020] [Revised: 07/15/2020] [Accepted: 08/01/2020] [Indexed: 06/11/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Lethal removal of invasive species, such as wild pigs (Sus scrofa), is often the most efficient approach for reducing their negative impacts. Wild pigs are one of the most widespread and destructive invasive mammals in the USA. Lethal management techniques are a key approach for wild pigs and can alter wild pig spatial behavior, but it is unclear how wild pigs respond to the most common removal technique, trapping. We investigated the spatial behavior of wild pigs following intensive removal of conspecifics via trapping at three sites within the Savannah River Site, SC, USA. We evaluated changes in wild pig densities, estimated temporal shifts in home-range properties, and evaluated fine-scale movement responses of wild pigs to removal. RESULTS We observed a significant reduction in the density of wild pigs in one site following removal via trapping while a qualitative reduction was observed in another site. We found little evidence of shifts in pig home-ranging behavior following removal. However, we did observe a nuanced response in movement behavior of wild pigs to the removal at the scale of the GPS locations (4 h), including increased movement speed and reduced selection for vegetation rich areas. CONCLUSION Our work provides a better understanding of the impact of removal via trapping on wild pig movement and its implications for management. The lack of shift in home-range characteristics observed illustrates how targeted trapping could be used to provide temporary relief for species sensitive to wild pig consumption such as ground nesting birds or agricultural crops.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Guillaume Bastille-Rousseau
- United States Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, Wildlife Services, National Wildlife Research Center, Fort Collins, CO, USA
- Department of Fish, Wildlife, and Conservation Biology, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO, USA
| | - Peter E Schlichting
- Savannah River Ecology Lab, Warnell School of Forestry and Natural Resources, University of Georgia, Aiken, SC, USA
| | - David A Keiter
- Savannah River Ecology Lab, Warnell School of Forestry and Natural Resources, University of Georgia, Aiken, SC, USA
| | - Joshua B Smith
- Savannah River Ecology Lab, Warnell School of Forestry and Natural Resources, University of Georgia, Aiken, SC, USA
| | - John C Kilgo
- United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern Research Station, New Ellenton, SC, USA
| | - George Wittemyer
- Department of Fish, Wildlife, and Conservation Biology, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO, USA
| | - Kurt C Vercauteren
- United States Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, Wildlife Services, National Wildlife Research Center, Fort Collins, CO, USA
| | - James C Beasley
- Savannah River Ecology Lab, Warnell School of Forestry and Natural Resources, University of Georgia, Aiken, SC, USA
| | - Kim M Pepin
- United States Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, Wildlife Services, National Wildlife Research Center, Fort Collins, CO, USA
| |
Collapse
|