Physical Capture and Restraint

Shury, Todd

doi:10.1002/9781118792919.ch7

Cited by 6 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 44 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Methods developed for trapping wild artiodactyls consist mainly in restraining/live trapping systems that have been used primarily for research, population monitoring and/or translocation purposes. These include mainly different kinds of cage and corral traps, as well as net-based systems (drop-, drive- or gun-nets), also used with less attention to animal welfare in the past and increasing standards later promoted by institutional Animal Care and Use Committees, domestic regulations and/or research studies 30 , 31 . These methods have been mostly evaluated in terms of capture efficiency and level of case morbidity and mortality associated to the capture methods.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing mammal trapping standards in wild boar drop-net capture

Conejero

López‐Olvera

González‐Crespo

et al. 2022

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Applying contemporary trapping standards when managing wildlife should no longer be an option, but a duty. Increasing wild boar populations originate a growing number of conflicts and hunting is the only cost-effective management option in most cases. However, new scenarios where hunting is unfeasible emerge and trapping necessities cope with lacking regulatory frameworks and technical guidelines. In this research, we evaluated drop nets, a capture method not considered by the international trapping standards, to capture Eurasian wild boar (Sus scrofa), a wildlife species not included in the list of mammal species under the scope of the Agreement on International Humane Trapping Standards (AIHTS). Less than 20% of the captured wild boars presented moderate or severe injuries attributable to the capture method, hence fulfilling the acceptance thresholds of the outdated AIHTS. Based on the new standards thresholds of acceptance, the humaneness of drop-nets in our study ranged 66–78%, under the 85% required. The capture success and selectivity were 100%, as ensured by operator-driven triggering, which should be considered the main strengths of this method, together with the minimization of animal suffering owing the short duration of the stressful situation. Additionally, in spite of the socially adverse environment, with people contrary to wild boar removal, no disturbances against the capture system or operations occurred. This is the first assessment of a drop-net capture method according to internationally accepted mammal trapping standards, with unconclusive results. However, there is a need for adapted procedures and thresholds of acceptance aimed at not-mechanical traps in general, and specifically at drop-nets. Compared to other live-capture methods, drop-nets minimize the duration of the stressful situation —at the expense of a strong adrenergic acute response—, maximize the probabilities of capturing entire sounders of prosocial species, which may be also considered as more humane, and has the ability to coordinate higher values of capture success, absolute selectivity and adaptability to difficult environments.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing mammal trapping standards in wild boar drop-net capture

Conejero

López‐Olvera

González‐Crespo

et al. 2022

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Other species of cervid have been captured using physical restraint (e.g. trapping or netting) (Shury 2014), chemical restraint (e.g. darting or 'remote chemical immobilisation') (Kreeger and Arnemo 2018) or a combination of the two approaches (Hampton et al 2019a).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluating aerial net gunning and chemical immobilisation for capture of invasive sambar deer (Rusa unicolor) and red deer (Cervus elaphus) in alpine Australia

McCarthy,

Hampton,

Hunt

et al. 2023

Wildlife Res.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Context Deer species are expanding in distribution and abundance in Australia. There is increasing focus on the ecology of these species, but effective deer capture methods are needed for telemetry studies. Aims The aims of this study were to develop, assess and refine a helicopter-based capture technique for wild sambar deer (Rusa unicolor) and red deer (Cervus elaphus), based on trials in south-eastern Australia. Methods We captured and collared 14 sambar deer and five red deer in two operations in Kosciuszko National Park in 2021, using a combination of aerial net gunning and chemical immobilisation delivered via hand injection. Captured animals were fitted with GPS collars to track their movements and activity post-capture. Physiological measurements were recorded as a means of assessing responses to capture and to optimise animal welfare outcomes. Key results Twenty-two deer were pursued and captured, with a total mortality rate of 14% (n = 3). The frequency of mortalities decreased from the first operation (17%) to the second operation (10%), largely attributed to allowable helicopter pursuit times being reduced. Post-release movement data indicated that delayed mortality due to capture did not occur. Activity of collared deer was lowest immediately following collaring, suggesting the procedure caused short-term decreases in deer activity. Conclusions Aerial capture of wild sambar deer and red deer poses animal welfare risks, but these can be minimised through the refinement in net gunning and pharmacological procedures to minimise animal stress. Implications This study describes an effective method for the safe capture of sambar deer and red deer, which will assist future wildlife researchers to further refine helicopter-based capture protocols and to collect spatial ecology and survival information about these species.

show abstract

Nalbuphine, medetomidine, and azaperone use in free‐ranging American black bears and mountain lions in Wyoming

Hashem,

Van Wick,

Allen

2024

J Wildl Manag

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Safe and effective chemical immobilization is a necessary component of large carnivore management and research, but laws regulating controlled substances can limit the use of many drugs by non‐veterinary personnel. NalMed‐A (40 mg/mL nalbuphine HCl, 10 mg/mL medetomidine HCl, 10 mg/mL azaperone tartrate) is a non‐controlled drug combination used to immobilize a number of free‐ranging species, but there are limited published reports of its usage by non‐veterinary personnel when immobilizing American black bears (Ursus americanus) and mountain lions (Puma concolor). Additionally, there are some safety concerns regarding anecdotal reports of spontaneous arousals occurring in large carnivores immobilized with NalMed‐A. We performed a retrospective analysis of capture forms for free‐ranging black bears (n = 34) and mountain lions (n = 7) immobilized with NalMed‐A by non‐veterinary personnel across Wyoming, USA, in 2017 and 2019–2024. Induction (x̅ ± SE) was 10.74 ± 1.16 minutes for black bears (n = 34) and 7.14 ± 1.60 for mountain lions (n = 7). Reversal was 14.21 ± 1.51 minutes for black bears (n = 28) and 10.00 ± 1.26 minutes for mountain lions (n = 5). We used non‐parametric tests (Kruskal‐Wallis, Wilcoxon rank sum) and odds ratios to examine the effect of certain parameters on induction times, redoses, and spontaneous arousals in black bears. Median induction time for black bears injected in their hind leg or rump was greater than for black bears injected in their shoulder (n = 34, W = 79.5, P = 0.045). Six black bears (18%) experienced spontaneous arousals. We recommend avoiding the hind leg and rump for dart placement in bears, and using hobbles and a muzzle for large carnivores when using NalMed‐A in a free‐ranging setting because of the risk of spontaneous arousals.

show abstract

Physical Capture and Restraint

Cited by 6 publications

References 44 publications

Assessing mammal trapping standards in wild boar drop-net capture

Assessing mammal trapping standards in wild boar drop-net capture

Evaluating aerial net gunning and chemical immobilisation for capture of invasive sambar deer (Rusa unicolor) and red deer (Cervus elaphus) in alpine Australia

Nalbuphine, medetomidine, and azaperone use in free‐ranging American black bears and mountain lions in Wyoming

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About