Field evaluation of four 1080 baits for dingo control

Eldridge, Stephen R.; Berman, David M.; Walsh, Brenda

doi:10.1071/wr99037

Cited by 10 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Without additional testing (e.g. Eldridge et al 2000), one should not assume equivalence among bait types -we emphasise that these trials used only red-meat baits rather than commercial, manufactured baits. Finally, this study did not investigate non-lethal control (Fleming et al 2001;Jenkins 2003;van Bommel and Johnson 2014), ground baiting, shooting or combinations of these with aerial baiting, so we could draw no reliable conclusions about the relative efficacy of aerial baiting compared with these alternatives.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Aerial baiting and wild dog mortality in south-eastern Australia

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ContextWild dogs, including dingoes and dingo cross-breeds, are vertebrate pests when they cause financial losses and emotional costs by harming livestock or pets, threaten human safety or endanger native fauna. Tools for lethal management of these animals currently include aerial baiting with poisoned baits. In New South Wales (NSW), Australia, aerial baiting was previously permitted at a rate of 40 baits km−1 but a maximum rate of 10 baits km−1 was subsequently prescribed by the Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority. The efficacy of these baiting rates has not been quantified in eastern Australia, undermining the value of the policy and rendering adaptive management efforts difficult, at best. AimTo quantify the mortality rate of wild dogs exposed to aerial baiting at historic and currently approved rates, i.e. 40 baits per kilometre and 10 baits per kilometre, respectively. MethodsWild dog mortality rates were measured at sites in mesic north-eastern NSW, where aerial baiting was applied to control wild dogs and contrasted with sites and individuals where no baiting was undertaken. In total, 132 wild dogs were trapped and fitted with GPS-VHF telemetry collars before annual aerial baiting programs. Collars were used to locate animals after aerial baiting and to determine the fates of individuals. Key results90.6% of collared wild dogs exposed to aerial baiting at 40 baits km−1 died, whereas only 55.3% of those exposed to 10 baits km−1 died (Welsh’s t=4.478, P=0.004, v=6.95). All wild dogs that were not exposed to toxic baits survived during the same periods. ConclusionManagers using aerial baiting to maximise wild dog mortality in mesic south-eastern Australia should use 40 baits km−1 rather than 10 baits km−1. ImplicationsWild dog population reduction for mitigation of livestock and faunal predation requires the application of efficacious control. The currently prescribed maximum aerial baiting rate of 10 baits km−1 is inadequate for controlling wild dog populations in mesic forest environments in NSW.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Aerial baiting and wild dog mortality in south-eastern Australia

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Where direct observations or density estimates are not required or possible, indirect counts or indices of relative abundance are employed from which population trends may be monitored (Caughley 1977;Lancia et al 1994;Pollock 1995;Evangelista et al 2009). The literature contains numerous examples of where indices are applied to monitor trends in abundance (for examples, see Beier and Cunningham 1996;Blaum et al 2008;Edwards et al 2002;, their response to management actions Eldridge et al 2000) and sometimes their relationship to other species (for examples, see Catling and Burt 1995;Letnic et al 2009). The greatest value of indirect abundance measures is in monitoring population trends at the same location or from different, but similar locations at the same time (Lancia et al 1994;Pollock 1995;Engeman 2005).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluating and validating abundance monitoring methods in the absence of populations of known size: review and application to a passive tracking index

Allen¹,

Engeman²

2014

Environ Sci Pollut Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Rarely is it possible to obtain absolute numbers in free-ranging populations and although various direct and indirect methods are used to estimate abundance, few are validated against populations of known size. In this paper, we apply grounding, calibration and verification methods, used to validate mathematical models, to methods of estimating relative abundance. To illustrate how this might be done, we consider and evaluate the widely applied passive tracking index (PTI) methodology. Using published data, we examine the rationality of PTI methodology, how conceptually animal activity and abundance are related and how alternative methods are subject to similar biases or produce similar abundance estimates and trends. We then attune the method against populations representing a range of densities likely to be encountered in the field. Finally, we compare PTI trends against a prediction that adjacent populations of the same species will have similar abundance values and trends in activity. We show that while PTI abundance estimates are subject to environmental and behavioural stochasticity peculiar to each species, the PTI method and associated variance estimate showed high probability of detection, high precision of abundance values and, generally, low variability between surveys, and suggest that the PTI method applied using this procedure and for these species provides a sensitive and credible index of abundance. This same or similar validation approach can and should be applied to alternative relative abundance methods in order to demonstrate their credibility and justify their use.

show abstract