Behavioral and Physiological Responses of Trap-Induced Stress in European Badgers

Schütz, Karin E.; Ågren, Erik; Amundin, Mats; Röken, Bengt; Palme, Rüpert; Mörner, Torsten

doi:10.2193/0022-541x(2006)70[884:baprot]2.0.co;2

Cited by 32 publications

(31 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Given the duration of the project and the high recapture rates of foxes (Roemer et al 1994), there was great potential to negatively impact foxes. By having fewer recaptures, we minimized the incidence of traprelated trauma, such as broken teeth and elevated stress levels (White et al 1991;Mowat, Slough & Rivard 1994;Fletcher & Boonstra 2006;Schu¨tz et al 2006). Foxes also spent less time confined in traps thereby helping to maintain social systems and since our trapping spanned the fox breeding season, it is likely that we minimized the confinement of females with dependent pups.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Although box traps have been shown to be less traumatic to captured animals than foothold traps or snares (Kreeger et al 1990;Mowat, Slough & Rivard 1994), they are not a benign method (Proulx & Barrett 1989;Putman 1995). Confinement in box traps can cause physiological stress in many species of mammals (White et al 1991;Fletcher & Boonstra 2006;Schu¨tz et al 2006), often resulting in physical injury (e.g. broken jaws, teeth or claws) (Neighbor et al 1991;Covell 1992;Mowat, Slough & Rivard 1994;R.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Reducing nontarget recaptures of an endangered predator using conditioned aversion and reward removal

Phillips

Winchell

2011

Journal of Applied Ecology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary 1.Live-trapping is a fundamental tool in the study of wildlife species and populations. Capture of nontarget species is an inherent side-effect of trapping animals that is inefficient and potentially detrimental to individuals and populations. Reducing recapture of nontarget species will increase the efficiency of long-term studies and projects, and minimize unwanted impacts. 2. During the initial stages of a 3-year feral cat Felis catus control programme on San Clemente Island, California, USA, we experienced high recapture rates of nontarget endangered San Clemente Island foxes Urocyon littoralis clementae, impacting project efficiency and potentially foxes. 3. We investigated whether we could modify our baiting strategy to reduce fox recaptures using behavioural modification techniques, while simultaneously maintaining the ability to capture feral cats. We tested two strategies, aversive conditioning and reward removal, to reduce fox recapture rates. 4. Using lithium chloride (LC) as an aversive agent, we reduced fox recapture rates more than 10 times compared with rates using control bait. Using the reward removal technique, we reduced fox recapture rates almost 20 times compared with control baits. Neither behavioural modification technique deterred cats from entering traps, and our results suggest that by reducing fox recaptures, we improved our ability to capture cats. 5. Synthesis and applications. These novel baiting strategies have wide applicability in wildlife research and management. The efficiency of long-term monitoring or control programmes may be enhanced by discouraging recapture of 'trap happy' animals. Potential impacts to threatened species confined in traps could be minimized by reducing recaptures. Sampling of rare species in biodiversity studies could be improved by reducing recapture of competitively superior or numerically dominant species.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reducing nontarget recaptures of an endangered predator using conditioned aversion and reward removal

Phillips

Winchell

2011

Journal of Applied Ecology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As regards carnivores, traditional field methods are often based on distance sampling, including direct counts, transect sampling or sign surveys (Buckland et al 1993;Gese 2001;Wilson and Delahay 2001), or on capture-mark-recapture (CMR) techniques (Seber 1982;Karanth 1995;Gese 2001). These methods, however, do not provide accurate and reliable estimates of abundance or population trends (Kendall et al 1992;Mills et al 2000;McDonald 2004) or, in the case of capture methods involving direct handling of the animals, they may pose a risk of injury or even death to the animal (Arnemo et al 2006;Schütz et al 2006). In recent years, a noninvasive genetic approach has become available that allows the assessment of population size in elusive or endangered animals.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

An evaluation of field and noninvasive genetic methods for estimating Eurasian otter population size

et al. 2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Successful conservation and management of rare and elusive species requires reliable estimates of population size, but acquisition of such data is often challenging. We compare the two most frequently used methods of assessing abundance of Eurasian otter (Lutra lutra) populations, noninvasive genetic sampling (NGS) based on genotyping of faeces and field surveys using snow tracking. In a 100-km 2 oligotrophic otter habitat with linear water bodies, both methods yielded very similar estimates (10-12 individuals). However, in a 100-km 2 fishpond area, consisting of a complex network of rivers, fishponds, channels and marshes, genotyping of faeces revealed the presence of a higher number of individuals (46-50 genotypes) than the snow survey (38 individuals). NGS data analysed by capture-mark-recapture (CMR)-based software CAPWIRE provided even higher estimates, being twice the number assessed through snow tracking (76-81 individuals, CI 95% = 49-96 and 55-89). Our results suggest that the performance of both NGS and snow tracking is comparable in simple linear habitats, but in complex habitats with very high otter density a combination of genetic and field methods, or CMR analysis using genetic data, is recommended. We emphasise that to obtain reliable estimates using NGS it is necessary to follow strict protocols for detection and elimination of genotyping errors. Based on a literature review and our experience, we suggest improvements that may increase the success rate and efficiency of NGS for otters.

show abstract

“…Depending on their construction and placement, however, traps can cause physical injuries, elicit stress in animals, and catch non-target animals (Conover 2002;Schütz et al 2006;Iossa et al 2007). Furthermore, the public often expresses negative attitudes toward the use of traps (Manfredo et al 1999;White et al 2003), and public opposition in several US states has led to banning of certain trap types, e.g., leg-hold traps (Minnis 1998;Pacelle 1998).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Many European countries maintain yearly estimates of the number of animals taken by hunters, but European trapping statistics and research are limited to occasional data on the efficiency of catching animals (e.g., Díaz-Ruiz et al 2010;Short et al 2012) or on animal suffering (e.g., Schütz et al 2006). Consequently, there is little knowledge of the extent to which traps are being used, who uses traps, and what motivates the use of traps (but see Delibes-Mateos et al 2013).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Trapping in predator management: catching the profile of trap users in Sweden

2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Many populations of wildlife, including large-and medium-sized predators are increasing in Europe. Trapping can be one way to reduce negative impacts of predators on human interests, such as game species and threatened species, but there is little knowledge of trap usage and motivation behind it. We used a mail survey in Sweden (n=3,886 respondents) to compare predator trappers with hunters who used other methods to kill predators, and with other hunters who did not kill predators, in regard to sociodemographics, beliefs, behaviors, and constraints. During 12 months prior to the survey 19 % of respondents had trapped any small-or medium-sized predator, while 15 % of respondents had trapped and 55 % had hunted (without using traps) red fox (Vulpes vulpes), European badger (Meles meles), or corvid birds. Reducing predator numbers was an important reason for hunting predators with traps. Of predator trappers, 97 % had hunted species that were potentially prey of the targeted predators (e.g., roe deer [Capreolus capreolus], hare [Lepus spp.], and grouse), 94 % believed that there were too many red foxes, badgers, or corvids on their main hunting ground, and 64 % believed it to be very important to reduce predator numbers to benefit other game species. We conclude that the use of traps is widespread among Swedish hunters, and that increasing wildlife populations, increased presence of wildlife in urban areas, and management of invasive species calls for effective management actions, of which trapping can be one.

show abstract

Behavioral and Physiological Responses of Trap-Induced Stress in European Badgers

Cited by 32 publications

References 23 publications

Reducing nontarget recaptures of an endangered predator using conditioned aversion and reward removal

Reducing nontarget recaptures of an endangered predator using conditioned aversion and reward removal

An evaluation of field and noninvasive genetic methods for estimating Eurasian otter population size

Trapping in predator management: catching the profile of trap users in Sweden

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About