管理低丰度山区脊椎动物有害动物三鹿

IF 2.2 4区 环境科学与生态学 Q3 ECOLOGY
Stephanie Pulsford, Louisa Roberts, Mark Elford
{"title":"管理低丰度山区脊椎动物有害动物三鹿","authors":"Stephanie Pulsford,&nbsp;Louisa Roberts,&nbsp;Mark Elford","doi":"10.1111/emr.12569","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Invasive species such as vertebrate herbivores cause threats to native ecosystems through causing changes to vegetation composition and structure, competition, ecosystem engineering, impacts on soil, and through spreading disease. In the mountainous country of Australia, Sambar Deer (<i>Rusa unicolor</i>) are becoming an increasing threat to fragile and endangered ecosystems, which are also facing other significant threats such as climate change. Methods for ameliorating these impacts are currently limited to lethal control programmes through shooting or fencing key areas. Fencing is not a viable option for large areas and can have large logistical costs as well as negative ecological outcomes. This study aimed to compare two shooting methods (ground shooting vs thermally assisted aerial culling with thermal image operator) for controlling sambar at low densities in a mountainous area. This programme was the first to use this specific thermal technique for deer in mountainous country in Australia. We found that thermally assisted aerial culling was more effective for removing Sambar than ground shooting. Thermally assisted aerial culling removed more Sambar in total, shot more animals per hour, covered a larger search area, was cheaper per hectare covered, and had very high “seen”, “targeted”, and “shot” ratios. Ground shooting sessions were lower in cost overall, but the cost per hectare was higher and rate of Sambar shot was lower than that of thermally assisted aerial culling. Ground shooting did remove more Sambar per hectare as ground shooting focuses on a smaller area, but this advantage is outweighed by the fact that thermally assisted shooting also allowed the concurrent removal of Feral Pigs. This work indicates that thermally assisted aerial culling is the preferred method for effective management of Sambar in an alpine environment. Ground shooting may be beneficial when Sambar are concentrated in key areas or to complement initial knock down by thermally assisted aerial culling.</p>","PeriodicalId":54325,"journal":{"name":"Ecological Management & Restoration","volume":"23 3","pages":"261-270"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/emr.12569","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Managing vertebrate pest Sambar Deer at low abundance in mountains\",\"authors\":\"Stephanie Pulsford,&nbsp;Louisa Roberts,&nbsp;Mark Elford\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/emr.12569\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Invasive species such as vertebrate herbivores cause threats to native ecosystems through causing changes to vegetation composition and structure, competition, ecosystem engineering, impacts on soil, and through spreading disease. In the mountainous country of Australia, Sambar Deer (<i>Rusa unicolor</i>) are becoming an increasing threat to fragile and endangered ecosystems, which are also facing other significant threats such as climate change. Methods for ameliorating these impacts are currently limited to lethal control programmes through shooting or fencing key areas. Fencing is not a viable option for large areas and can have large logistical costs as well as negative ecological outcomes. This study aimed to compare two shooting methods (ground shooting vs thermally assisted aerial culling with thermal image operator) for controlling sambar at low densities in a mountainous area. This programme was the first to use this specific thermal technique for deer in mountainous country in Australia. We found that thermally assisted aerial culling was more effective for removing Sambar than ground shooting. Thermally assisted aerial culling removed more Sambar in total, shot more animals per hour, covered a larger search area, was cheaper per hectare covered, and had very high “seen”, “targeted”, and “shot” ratios. Ground shooting sessions were lower in cost overall, but the cost per hectare was higher and rate of Sambar shot was lower than that of thermally assisted aerial culling. Ground shooting did remove more Sambar per hectare as ground shooting focuses on a smaller area, but this advantage is outweighed by the fact that thermally assisted shooting also allowed the concurrent removal of Feral Pigs. This work indicates that thermally assisted aerial culling is the preferred method for effective management of Sambar in an alpine environment. Ground shooting may be beneficial when Sambar are concentrated in key areas or to complement initial knock down by thermally assisted aerial culling.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":54325,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Ecological Management & Restoration\",\"volume\":\"23 3\",\"pages\":\"261-270\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/emr.12569\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Ecological Management & Restoration\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"93\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/emr.12569\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"环境科学与生态学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ECOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ecological Management & Restoration","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/emr.12569","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

脊椎动物、食草动物等入侵物种通过改变植被组成和结构、竞争、生态系统工程、对土壤的影响以及传播疾病,对本地生态系统构成威胁。在澳大利亚的山区,山鹿(Rusa unicolor)正在对脆弱和濒危的生态系统构成越来越大的威胁,这些生态系统还面临着气候变化等其他重大威胁。改善这些影响的方法目前仅限于通过射击或封锁关键地区的致命控制规划。围栏在大范围内不是一个可行的选择,可能会带来巨大的物流成本和负面的生态后果。本研究的目的是比较两种拍摄方法(地面拍摄与热图像操作的热辅助空中剔除)对山区低密度桑巴的控制。这个项目是第一个在澳大利亚山区对鹿使用这种特殊热技术的项目。我们发现,热辅助空中扑杀比地面射击更有效地清除桑巴。热辅助空中扑杀总共清除了更多的桑巴,每小时射击更多的动物,覆盖更大的搜索区域,每公顷覆盖的成本更低,并且具有很高的“看到”,“目标”和“射击”比率。地面扑杀总体上成本较低,但每公顷成本较高,Sambar扑杀率低于热辅助空中扑杀。地面射击每公顷确实可以清除更多的桑巴,因为地面射击集中在一个较小的区域,但这一优势被热辅助射击也允许同时清除野猪的事实所抵消。这项工作表明,在高山环境中,热辅助空中扑杀是有效管理桑巴尔的首选方法。当桑巴集中在关键地区时,地面射击可能是有益的,或者通过热辅助空中扑杀来补充最初的击倒。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Managing vertebrate pest Sambar Deer at low abundance in mountains

Managing vertebrate pest Sambar Deer at low abundance in mountains

Invasive species such as vertebrate herbivores cause threats to native ecosystems through causing changes to vegetation composition and structure, competition, ecosystem engineering, impacts on soil, and through spreading disease. In the mountainous country of Australia, Sambar Deer (Rusa unicolor) are becoming an increasing threat to fragile and endangered ecosystems, which are also facing other significant threats such as climate change. Methods for ameliorating these impacts are currently limited to lethal control programmes through shooting or fencing key areas. Fencing is not a viable option for large areas and can have large logistical costs as well as negative ecological outcomes. This study aimed to compare two shooting methods (ground shooting vs thermally assisted aerial culling with thermal image operator) for controlling sambar at low densities in a mountainous area. This programme was the first to use this specific thermal technique for deer in mountainous country in Australia. We found that thermally assisted aerial culling was more effective for removing Sambar than ground shooting. Thermally assisted aerial culling removed more Sambar in total, shot more animals per hour, covered a larger search area, was cheaper per hectare covered, and had very high “seen”, “targeted”, and “shot” ratios. Ground shooting sessions were lower in cost overall, but the cost per hectare was higher and rate of Sambar shot was lower than that of thermally assisted aerial culling. Ground shooting did remove more Sambar per hectare as ground shooting focuses on a smaller area, but this advantage is outweighed by the fact that thermally assisted shooting also allowed the concurrent removal of Feral Pigs. This work indicates that thermally assisted aerial culling is the preferred method for effective management of Sambar in an alpine environment. Ground shooting may be beneficial when Sambar are concentrated in key areas or to complement initial knock down by thermally assisted aerial culling.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Ecological Management & Restoration
Ecological Management & Restoration Environmental Science-Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law
CiteScore
4.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: Ecological Management & Restoration is a peer-reviewed journal with the dual aims of (i) reporting the latest science to assist ecologically appropriate management and restoration actions and (ii) providing a forum for reporting on these actions. Guided by an editorial board made up of researchers and practitioners, EMR seeks features, topical opinion pieces, research reports, short notes and project summaries applicable to Australasian ecosystems to encourage more regionally-appropriate management. Where relevant, contributions should draw on international science and practice and highlight any relevance to the global challenge of integrating biodiversity conservation in a rapidly changing world. Topic areas: Improved management and restoration of plant communities, fauna and habitat; coastal, marine and riparian zones; restoration ethics and philosophy; planning; monitoring and assessment; policy and legislation; landscape pattern and design; integrated ecosystems management; socio-economic issues and solutions; techniques and methodology; threatened species; genetic issues; indigenous land management; weeds and feral animal control; landscape arts and aesthetics; education and communication; community involvement.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信