Wildlife Damage Management: Changes over the Last 40 Years and a Look at the Future

Abstract

Since becoming a wildlife biologist 40 years ago, I have seen many changes. Yet some things have remained the same, like the economic impact of wildlife damage, which was high in 1974 and even higher now. In 2014, the worldwide cost of damage by vertebrate pests to agriculture will exceed $1 billion. The world's human population has increased at an unprecedented rate, while some wildlife populations have also burgeoned over the past 40 years due to land-use changes and effective management programs. These simultaneous human and wildlife population increases have led to increasing conflicts between humans and wildlife. Nor has the international nature of damage changed: vertebrate pest control remains vital for agricultural production everywhere. And some types of wildlife damage are unchanged, such as livestock predation, bird damage to agricultural crops, and rodent damage to crops and stored grains. What has changed over the last 40 years? I see increasing complexity in the types of problems, in the solutions, and in the political landscape under which we work. Damage problems have become more complex, with invasive species being transported around the world, and with zoonotic diseases associated with wildlife becoming more prevalent. Solutions to damage problems have also become more complex, as simpler solutions have already been employed; solutions being sought now are more scientifically difficult and require collaboration by wildlife biologists with an increasing number of other scientific disciplines, such as toxicologists, geneticists, and epidemiologists. And society itself has become more complex, demanding solutions that not only prevent damage, but that are environmentally sound and politically acceptable. What does the future bring? Human population growth will mean more wildlife damage issues. Greater travel and international shipping will bring an increase in invasive species, and global warming will bring an increase in zoonotic diseases. Solutions will need to be innovative and reflect the complexity of the problems.

Killing time in cover crops? Artificial perches promote field use by raptors

“…Globally, vertebrate pests cause more than $1 billion in damage to crops every year (Fagerstone, 2014). Although rodent pests are commonly controlled with rodenticides, such chemicals carry a recognised risk to non‐target wildlife (Colvin, Hegdahl, & Jackson, 1988).…”

“Weight of evidence” as a tool for evaluating disease in wildlife: An example assessing parasitic infection in Northern bobwhite (Colinus virginianus)

“…Now in 2020, with climate change, habitat degradation, invasive species, and growing human populations eroding the wild heritage Leopold sought so fervently to protect, these words are more pertinent than the day they were written. Yet, it was only recently that wildlife diseases became a “New Frontier” in conservation ( Fagerstone, 2014 ; Friend, 2014 ), likely due to the persistent paradigm that diseases are a natural regulatory mechanism of healthy populations with the ultimate outcome being one in which the host was not harmed ( Elton, 1931 ; Lack, 1954 ). However, Leopold looked past this narrow view of diseases, stressing the need to consider the effects of factors such as microbes, parasites, contaminants, malnourishment, and any combination thereof, a perspective which was far ahead of its time.…”

“…Despite this, progress has been made regarding wildlife disease research and conservation, particularly considering that prior to 2000 wildlife diseases were largely ignored unless they affected game species or livestock ( Fagerstone, 2014 ; Cunningham et al, 2017 ; Preece et al, 2017 ). For example, the lessons learned from chytridiomycosis, which has been implicated in the decline or extinction of 501 amphibian species ( Scheele et al, 2019 ), facilitated a quicker response to white-nose syndrome in bats, with the pathogen being identified and management plans in place within four years ( Voyles et al, 2015 ).…”

“…For example, the lessons learned from chytridiomycosis, which has been implicated in the decline or extinction of 501 amphibian species ( Scheele et al, 2019 ), facilitated a quicker response to white-nose syndrome in bats, with the pathogen being identified and management plans in place within four years ( Voyles et al, 2015 ). Then in 2011, the National Wildlife Research Center (NWRC) listed wildlife diseases as a priority for the first time on their research needs assessment ( Tobin et al, 2012 ; Fagerstone, 2014 ). Unfortunately, the wildlife diseases that still gain the most attention either cause massive die-offs, affect game species, domestic animals, or humans ( Deem et al, 2001 ; Friend, 2014 ; Polley and Thompson, 2015 ); meanwhile diseases with less obvious but substantial effects are overlooked ( Wobeser, 2006 ; Wood and Johnson, 2015 ).…”