Alistair S. Glen

Complex interactions among mammalian carnivores in Australia, and their implications for wildlife management

Mammalian carnivore populations are often intensively managed, either because the carnivore in question is endangered, or because it is viewed as a pest and is subjected to control measures, or both. Most management programmes treat carnivore species in isolation. However, there is a large and emerging body of evidence to demonstrate that populations of different carnivores interact with each other in a variety of complex ways. Thus, the removal or introduction of predators to or from a system can often affect other species in ways that are difficult to predict. Wildlife managers must consider such interactions when planning predator control programmes. Integrated predator control will require a greater understanding of the complex relationships between species.

Ecosystem restoration with teeth: what role for predators?

Recent advances highlight the potential for predators to restore ecosystems and confer resilience against globally threatening processes, including climate change and biological invasions. However, releasing the ecological benefits of predators entails significant challenges. Here, we discuss the economic, environmental and social considerations affecting predator-driven ecological restoration programmes, and suggest approaches for reducing the undesirable impacts of predators. Because the roles of predators are context dependent, we argue for increased emphasis on predator functionality in ecosystems and less on the identities and origins of species and genotypes. We emphasise that insufficient attention is currently given to the importance of variation in the social structures and behaviours of predators in influencing the dynamics of trophic interactions. Lastly, we outline experiments specifically designed to clarify the ecological roles of predators and their potential utility in ecosystem restoration.

Invasive predators and global biodiversity loss

Significance Invasive mammalian predators are arguably the most damaging group of alien animal species for global biodiversity. Thirty species of invasive predator are implicated in the extinction or endangerment of 738 vertebrate species—collectively contributing to 58% of all bird, mammal, and reptile extinctions. Cats, rodents, dogs, and pigs have the most pervasive impacts, and endemic island faunas are most vulnerable to invasive predators. That most impacted species are insular indicates that management of invasive predators on islands should be a global conservation priority. Understanding and mitigating the impact of invasive mammalian predators is essential for reducing the rate of global biodiversity loss. Invasive species threaten biodiversity globally, and invasive mammalian predators are particularly damaging, having contributed to considerable species decline and extinction. We provide a global metaanalysis of these impacts and reveal their full extent. Invasive predators are implicated in 87 bird, 45 mammal, and 10 reptile species extinctions—58% of these groups’ contemporary extinctions worldwide. These figures are likely underestimated because 23 critically endangered species that we assessed are classed as “possibly extinct.” Invasive mammalian predators endanger a further 596 species at risk of extinction, with cats, rodents, dogs, and pigs threatening the most species overall. Species most at risk from predators have high evolutionary distinctiveness and inhabit insular environments. Invasive mammalian predators are therefore important drivers of irreversible loss of phylogenetic diversity worldwide. That most impacted species are insular indicates that management of invasive predators on islands should be a global conservation priority. Understanding and mitigating the impact of invasive mammalian predators is essential for reducing the rate of global biodiversity loss.

Eradicating multiple invasive species on inhabited islands: The next big step in island restoration?

Invasive species are the greatest threat to island ecosystems, which harbour nearly half the world’s endangered biodiversity. However, eradication is more feasible on islands than on continents. We present a global analysis of 1,224 successful eradications of invasive plants and animals on 808 islands. Most involve single vertebrate species on uninhabited islands, but plant and invertebrate eradications occur more often on inhabited islands. Inhabited islands are often highly modified and support numerous introduced species. Consequently, targeting a single invasive species can be ineffective or counterproductive. The impacts of other pests will continue and, in some cases, be exacerbated. The presence of people also creates regulatory, logistical and socio-political constraints. Real or perceived health risks to inhabitants, pets and livestock may restrict the use of some eradication tools, and communities or individuals sometimes oppose eradication. Despite such challenges, managing invasive species is vital to conserve and restore the unique biodiversity of many inhabited islands, and to maintain or improve the welfare and livelihoods of island residents. We present a brief case study of the Juan Fernández Archipelago, Chile, and discuss the feasibility of eradicating large suites of invasive plants and animals from inhabited islands while managing other invaders for which eradication is not feasible or desirable. Eradications must be planned to account for species interactions. Monitoring and contingency plans must detect and address any ‘surprise effects’. Above all, it is important that the local community derives social, cultural and/or economic benefits, and that people support and are engaged in the restoration effort.

Optimising camera traps for monitoring small mammals.

Practical techniques are required to monitor invasive animals, which are often cryptic and occur at low density. Camera traps have potential for this purpose, but may have problems detecting and identifying small species. A further challenge is how to standardise the size of each camera’s field of view so capture rates are comparable between different places and times. We investigated the optimal specifications for a low-cost camera trap for small mammals. The factors tested were 1) trigger speed, 2) passive infrared vs. microwave sensor, 3) white vs. infrared flash, and 4) still photographs vs. video. We also tested a new approach to standardise each camera’s field of view. We compared the success rates of four camera trap designs in detecting and taking recognisable photographs of captive stoats ( Mustela erminea ), feral cats (Felis catus) and hedgehogs ( Erinaceus europaeus ). Trigger speeds of 0.2–2.1 s captured photographs of all three target species unless the animal was running at high speed. The camera with a microwave sensor was prone to false triggers, and often failed to trigger when an animal moved in front of it. A white flash produced photographs that were more readily identified to species than those obtained under infrared light. However, a white flash may be more likely to frighten target animals, potentially affecting detection probabilities. Video footage achieved similar success rates to still cameras but required more processing time and computer memory. Placing two camera traps side by side achieved a higher success rate than using a single camera. Camera traps show considerable promise for monitoring invasive mammal control operations. Further research should address how best to standardise the size of each camera’s field of view, maximise the probability that an animal encountering a camera trap will be detected, and eliminate visible or audible cues emitted by camera traps.

Monitoring bait removal in vertebrate pest control: a comparison using track identification and remote photography

The removal of non-toxic fox baits was monitored simultaneously using identification of tracks in sand plots and an inexpensive method of remote photography. During 1126 bait-nights carried out using both methods at sites in the central and northern tablelands of New South Wales, 106 baits were removed by a variety of target and non-target animals. Whereas the results of sand plots may be inaccurate or unreliable, particularly during poor weather conditions, remote photography provides results that are less open to misinterpretation.

Could controlling mammalian carnivores lead to mesopredator release of carnivorous reptiles

Emerging evidence increasingly illustrates the importance of a holistic, rather than taxon-specific, approach to the study of ecological communities. Considerable resources are expended to manage both introduced and native mammalian carnivores to improve conservation outcomes; however, management can result in unforeseen and sometimes catastrophic outcomes. Varanid lizards are likely to be apex- or mesopredators, but being reptiles are rarely considered by managers and researchers when investigating the impacts of mammalian carnivore management. Instances of mesopredator release have been described for Varanus gouldii as a result of fox and cat management in Australia, with cascading effects on faunal community structure. A meta-analysis showing extensive dietary niche overlap between varanids, foxes and cats plus a review of experimental and circumstantial evidence suggests mesopredator release of V. gouldii and about five other medium to large species of varanid lizard is likely in other regions. This highlights the need for managers to adopt a whole-of-community approach when attempting to manage predators for sustained fauna conservation, and that additional research is required to elucidate whether mesopredator release of varanids is a widespread consequence of carnivore management, altering the intended faunal responses.

Effects of bait-station design on the uptake of baits by non-target animals during control programmes for foxes and wild dogs

The removal of non-toxic baits was monitored during a simulated trail-baiting programme for foxes and wild dogs in the central tablelands of New South Wales. Ninety-one buried baits were removed by a number of species including spotted-tailed quolls, Australian brush-turkeys, superb lyrebirds, small mammals, wild dogs and a red fox. Spotted-tailed quolls were significantly less likely to remove baits buried under the ground surface than baits buried in raised mounds of soil. By means of remote photography, individual quolls were identified removing 3–4 baits in one night from bait stations 400 m apart. The results of this study show that spotted-tailed quolls and other non-target species may face substantial risk of consuming baits intended for wild dogs and foxes. However, the risk of poisoning spotted-tailed quolls may be significantly reduced by appropriate planning. Recommendations are made to increase the target-specificity of baiting programmes in areas with populations of spotted-tailed quolls.

Connectivity and invasive species management: towards an integrated landscape approach

Invasive plants and animals are a major cause of global biodiversity loss. Invasive Species Management (ISM) helps conserve localized populations and ecosystems, but rarely have its potential benefits been explored at the landscape scale. We explore how ISM can enhance landscape connectivity, and how its incorporation into conservation planning algorithms could help design optimal reserve networks. Conversely, conservation planning and connectivity modelling can optimize targeting of ISM, achieving benefits for a wider range of taxa and ecological processes, without the need for additional resources. Empirical research must investigate the spatial pattern of benefits from ISM, and when to target priority conservation sites or the areas (matrix) between them. By bolstering populations within—and increasing connectivity between—focal patches, ISM should move beyond conserving individual sites to creating functionally connected networks of conservation areas.

The success of GPS collar deployments on mammals in Australia

Global Positioning System (GPS) wildlife telemetry collars are being used increasingly to understand the movement patterns of wild mammals. However, there are few published studies on which to gauge their general utility and success. This paper highlights issues faced by some of the first researchers to use GPS technology for terrestrial mammal tracking in Australia. Our collated data cover 24 studies where GPS collars were used in 280 deployments on 13 species, including dingoes or other wild dogs (Canis lupus dingo and hybrids), cats (Felis catus), foxes (Vulpes vulpes), kangaroos (Macropus giganteus), koalas (Phascolarctos cinereus), livestock guardian dogs (C. l. familiaris), pademelons (Thylogale billardierii), possums (Trichosurus cunninghami), quolls (Dasyurus geoffroii and D. maculatus), wallabies (Macropus rufogriseus and Petrogale lateralis), and wombats (Vombatus ursinus). Common problems encountered were associated with collar design, the GPS, VHF and timed-release components, and unforseen costs in retrieving and refurbishing collars. We discuss the implications of collar failures for research programs and animal welfare, and suggest how these could be avoided or improved. Our intention is to provide constructive advice so that researchers and manufacturers can make informed decisions about using this technology, and maximise the many benefits of GPS while reducing the risks.