Predators, Predation, & Predator Control

1
Predators, Predation, Predator Control
Bruce D. Leopold, Mississippi State University
2
Historical Perspective

• Harmony with the land is like harmony with a
  friend, you cannot cherish his right hand and
  chop off his left. That is to say, you cant
  love game and hate predators, the land is one
  organism.

3
Historical Perspective
4
Predator Control Under Scrutiny

• Leopold Report (A. Starker)- 1964
• Cain Report - 1972
• Nixon (by Executive Order) stopped use of all
  poisons on federal lands or use by federal
  agencies to control predators

5
Trends Regarding Furbearing Predators
6
(No Transcript)
7
(No Transcript)
8
(No Transcript)
9
Possible Effects????
10
(No Transcript)
11
Before History Repeats Itself
?
12
Predators- Their Value

• A natural component of the ecosystem, often
  aiding in maintaining stability
• Often remove sick and injured individuals from
  the population
• Serve to keep animals wild and wary
• Often regulate prey populations, many of these
  prey populations are equally harmful to game
  animals
• Are valuable as sport animals

13
Predators- Societal ValuesSurvey of 1500
households

• have a right to exist
• should be reintroduced to former ranges
• do need to be managed, but with conditions
• should not be hunted or trapped unconditionally
• are not the cause of game population declines
• play an important role to maintain balanced
  natural systems
• gt They do support predator management!!!

14
Before Biologists Jump into Predator Control,
They Need to Consider Many Factors
15
Prey
Predator
16
(No Transcript)
17
(No Transcript)
18
(No Transcript)
19
Animal Welfare Issues

• Animal Welfare Act Amendments
• Recently to include birds and rodents
• University IACUCs
• Federal Funds and State Agencies (PR DJ)
• Initiatives to stop trapping and hunting

20
Must Be Careful of the Message

• Kill predators so that we have more game to
  harvest
• NWTF- Resolution- Not to Use Predator Control to
  enhance single species
• SE Section TWS- Resolution- Not to Use Predator
  Control to enhance single species

21
(No Transcript)
22
(No Transcript)
23
Management activities conducive to predators

• Logging roads/Access roads Travel Corridors
• Food plots Concentrating prey Predictability
• Maintain early successional stages Food base
• Small management units Increased efficiency

24
Identifying the True Culprit
25
(No Transcript)
26
Decimating versus Limiting FactorsNest Losses

• Massachusetts- 22
• Alabama 85
• Kentucky 1975- 55
• 1978- 80
• Texas 1972- 61
• 1980- 56
• 1987- 100

27
Prey Adaptations- CoevolutionThe Wild Turkey

• Large body size
• Long-lived
• Roost in trees
• Form flocks
• Large clutch sizes
• Prefer open habitats
• Hen moves great distances when disturbed

28
(No Transcript)
29
Density-dependent ResponsesStudy in Texas and
Coyote

• With intensive control litter size- 6.56
• With no control litter size- 3.65
• Well nourished coyote- from 10-12 pups

30
Interactions

• Coyote in Texas- w/ control, less rodent richness
  and diversity
• In SE US, coyote versus red fox
• Prairie- wolf versus meso-carnivores (raccoons,
  fox, skunk)

31
Predator ControlWhen is it warranted?The
Wildlife Society

• When introducing a species to former habitat
• Endangered/threatened species
• Man-induced disruption

32
Problems identified with Predator Control

• Coyote- requires 75 reduction in population to
  observe a change in population status
• Must be intensive first 3-4 years
• Can not stop
• Can not be haphazard
• Not cost-effective

33
Past Research ResultsPredator control will
enhance game populations

• White-tailed deer
• Wild turkey
• Pheasant
• Waterfowl
• Northern bobwhite

Problem is in every study, cost of the extra
animals was excessive
34
Possible solutionsHabitat manipulations

• Pronghorn and Coyote- Utah
• White-tailed deer and Coyote- Texas

35
(No Transcript)
36
Protocol for Predator Control

• What are the management goals and thus management
  objectives for the prey (game animal)? Are they
  reasonable and biologically sound?
• Has predation been identified as the ultimate
  mortality factor rather than a proximate factor?
• Has the predator species been identified
  correctly? Has appropriate Aevidence_at_ been
  collected and reliably identified (tracks,
  photos, sign on carcasses or eggs, etc.)
• Have extrinsic, contributing factors been
  examined throughly (habitat conditions, weather
  effects, land management activities) that may
  have, on the short-time, caused an imbalance in
  predator and/or prey species abundance(s)?
• Has the target predator species role within the
  system been evaluated thoroughly to ensure that
  the control operation may not further disrupt
  existing balances?

37
Protocol for Predator Control

• Have alternatives to active predator removal been
  examined based on evaluation conducted
  previously?
• can habitat manipulation achieve desired goals?
• can subtle changes in current land management be
  implemented?
• can more desirable predator species be enhanced
  to counter more detrimental species? Note
  enhanced can simply mean to cease trapping that
  predator species (e.g., coyote versus red fox)
• Clearly define the objectives of the predator
  management program
• What is the desired population response (e.g.,
  density) of the prey (game animal)?
• What is the desired percentage reduction in the
  target predator population?
• What monitoring program(s) will be implemented to
  monitor response of prey species and target
  predator species?

38
Protocol for Predator Control

• Ensure that Best Management Practices (BMPs) for
  trapping (based on draft BMPs under development)
  are adhered to. These include
• appropriate traps that minimize injury to animal,
  
• appropriate frequency of trap-line checking,
• maintaining a trap-line size consistent with
  available resources,
• capture of non-target species is monitored and
  minimized. If excessive, trapping procedures
  should be reevaluated and modified, and
• appropriate euthanasia procedure(s) for animals
  are implemented.
• Have societal beliefs (especially local and
  regional) been examined and considered?
• if potential problems are identified, develop a
  concise response that provides empirically-based
  data, program objectives, and target species.
• all staff should provide a consistent response
  when inquiries are made about the predator
  management program, or inquires should be
  redirected to one individual

39
Protocol for Predator Control

• Inappropriate behavior by staff should not be
  tolerated. Deviation from selected harvesting
  protocols and objectives should be stopped
  immediately.
• Carcasses should be disposed of discretely or
  used appropriately (food, museum displays, etc.).

40
(No Transcript)
41
Questions??