An alternative view of moorland management for Red Grouse <i>Lagopus lagopus scotica</i>

Sotherton, N. W.; Baines, David; Aebischer, Nicholas J.

doi:10.1111/ibi.12489

Cited by 16 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 33 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Recent attention has concentrated on the wider impacts of driven grouse shooting, including on factors such as carbon storage, water quality, and flood alleviation (e.g., Sotherton et al, 2017;Thompson et al, 2016) and on species of conservation concern (Watson & F I G U R E 2 Responses of red grouse and three wader species to predator control intensity. Predator control (expressed here as the number of full-time equivalent staff carrying out predator control per 1,000 ha) was selected in the best performing model for each of the plotted species.…”

Section: Implications For Moorland Managementmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Previous applied ecological research has informed arguments surrounding this conflict by revealing that: (a) illegal killing of raptors occurs on some grouse moors (e.g., Murgatroyd et al, 2019); and (b) predation by raptors can make driven grouse shooting economically unviable . More recently, debate around environmental issues associated with driven grouse shooting has broadened to include wider environmental impacts of moorland management, such as ecosystem service delivery through carbon storage and flood alleviation (e.g., Sotherton, Baines, & Aebischer, 2017;Thompson et al, 2016). However, the way in which moorland management, aimed at maximizing grouse numbers, impacts on wider ecological assemblages is still contested.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The influence of different aspects of grouse moorland management on nontarget bird assemblages

Littlewood

Mason

Hughes

et al. 2019

Ecology and Evolution

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Conflict between stakeholders with opposing interests can hamper biodiversity conservation. When conflicts become entrenched, evidence from applied ecology can reveal new ways forward for their management. In particular, where disagreement exists over the efficacy or ethics of management actions, research clarifying the uncertain impacts of management on wildlife can move debates forwards to conciliation. Here, we explore a case‐study of entrenched conflict where uncertainty exists over the impacts of multiple management actions: namely, moorlands managed for the shooting of red grouse (willow ptarmigan) Lagopus lagopus in the United Kingdom (UK). Debate over how UK moorlands should be managed is increasingly polarized. We evaluate, for the first time at a regional scale, the relative impacts of two major moorland management practices—predator control and heather burning—on nontarget bird species of conservation concern. Birds were surveyed on 18 estates across Northern England and Southeast Scotland. Sites ranged from intensively managed grouse moors to moorland sites with no management for grouse shooting. We hypothesised that both targeted predator control and burning regimes would enhance ground‐nesting wader numbers and, as a consequence of this, and of increased grouse numbers, nontarget avian predators should also be more abundant on heavily managed sites. There were positive associations between predator control and the abundance of the three most widespread species of ground‐nesting wader: strong effects for European golden plover Pluvialis apricaria and Eurasian curlew Numenius arquata and, less strongly, for common snipe Gallinago gallinago. These effects saturated at low levels of predator control. Evidence for effects of burning was much weaker. We found no evidence of enhanced numbers of nontarget predators on heavily managed sites.

show abstract

Section: Implications For Moorland Managementmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The influence of different aspects of grouse moorland management on nontarget bird assemblages

Littlewood

Mason

Hughes

et al. 2019

Ecology and Evolution

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…One form of global land use that cuts across habitat types and landscapes is recreational hunting (Loveridge, Reynolds, & Milner‐Gulland, ). Conservation and hunting organisations have shared interests in biodiversity and the value of integrating hunting and game management as a conservation tool has a long history (Leopold, ; Oldfield, Smith, Harrop, & Leader‐Williams, ; Sotherton, Baines, & Aebischer, ). Hunting has the potential to support biodiversity, as management practices specifically targeted at game may have positive effects on non‐game species (Arnett & Southwick, ; Oldfield et al., ; Sotherton et al., ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Conservation and hunting organisations have shared interests in biodiversity and the value of integrating hunting and game management as a conservation tool has a long history (Leopold, ; Oldfield, Smith, Harrop, & Leader‐Williams, ; Sotherton, Baines, & Aebischer, ). Hunting has the potential to support biodiversity, as management practices specifically targeted at game may have positive effects on non‐game species (Arnett & Southwick, ; Oldfield et al., ; Sotherton et al., ). Financial investment in management for hunting activities also contributes to the maintenance of some habitat types at the landscape scale, including upland heather moorland and farm woodlands in the UK, and Mediterranean scrub, dehesas and montados in Spain and Portugal (Arroyo, Delibes‐Mateos, Diaz‐Fernandez, & Viñuela, ; Robertson, Park, & Barton, ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…One form of global land use that cuts across habitat types and landscapes is recreational hunting (Loveridge, Reynolds, & Milner-Gulland, 2009). Conservation and hunting organisations have shared interests in biodiversity and the value of integrating hunting and game management as a conservation tool has a long history (Leopold, 1933;Oldfield, Smith, Harrop, & Leader-Williams, 2003;Sotherton, Baines, & Aebischer, 2017).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Consequences of game bird management for non‐game species in Europe

Mustin

Arroyo

Beja

et al. 2018

Journal of Applied Ecology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Game bird management has the potential to benefit conservation, as management practices specifically targeted at reducing the factors limiting game populations may have positive effects on non‐game species. However, such management may also have costs to species. We review the literature that examines the effect of different forms of game bird management on non‐target species in Europe, including habitat management, predator control, parasite control, provision of water and food and rear and release. We focus on Europe, where these forms of management are common and sometimes intensive. We identified 35 studies, which recorded 122 individual significant effects. Most studies (80%) focussed on the effects of habitat management and predator control, and >90% were carried out in the UK. 63% of the 122 significant effects on non‐game species were positive. Overall, 85% of the effects of habitat management in agricultural habitats were positive, while in non‐agricultural habitats 65% of effects were negative. Effects of rear and release were mixed (8 positive and 7 negative). Legal predator control was almost always positive (96% of effects), or benign, whereas illegal predator control was always negative (8 effects). This continues to be a major cost to conservation. No studies examined the effects of parasite control on non‐target wildlife. Three of four significant effects of supplementary feeding were negative. More studies are needed on the impacts of game bird management on non‐game species, and particularly of rear and release, the provision of supplementary food and water, and parasite control. We also found few experimental studies examining the specific effects of management for shooting of game birds, and very few studies overall outside the UK. Future studies should aim to fill these gaps. Synthesis and applications. The management of game bird populations for shooting is widespread across Europe. Our study shows that effects of such management practices vary between different non‐target species. There is a need to understand these trade‐offs, find effective strategies to limit the damaging aspects of game bird management and work to enhance the benefits for the conservation of biodiversity.

show abstract

Spatial and temporal variation in mountain hare (Lepus timidus) abundance in relation to red grouse (Lagopus lagopus scotica) management in Scotland

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An alternative view of moorland management for Red Grouse Lagopus lagopus scotica

Cited by 16 publications

References 33 publications

The influence of different aspects of grouse moorland management on nontarget bird assemblages

The influence of different aspects of grouse moorland management on nontarget bird assemblages

Consequences of game bird management for non‐game species in Europe

Spatial and temporal variation in mountain hare (Lepus timidus) abundance in relation to red grouse (Lagopus lagopus scotica) management in Scotland

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About