2004
DOI: 10.1017/s0376892904001572
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Damage reduction estimates and benefit-cost ratios for feral swine control from the last remnant of a basin marsh system in Florida

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
15
0

Year Published

2012
2012
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5
2
1

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 26 publications
(15 citation statements)
references
References 9 publications
0
15
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The latter include damage to crops and livestock, spread of diseases, vehicle collisions and reduction in plant and animal abundance and richness (e.g. Hone 2002;Engeman et al 2004;Massei and Genov 2004;Conover 2007). Although the species can be controlled through hunting (Massei et al 2011), it is essential to evaluate different options to manage overabundant populations, particularly in urban and/or protected areas where culling is unfeasible or undesirable.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The latter include damage to crops and livestock, spread of diseases, vehicle collisions and reduction in plant and animal abundance and richness (e.g. Hone 2002;Engeman et al 2004;Massei and Genov 2004;Conover 2007). Although the species can be controlled through hunting (Massei et al 2011), it is essential to evaluate different options to manage overabundant populations, particularly in urban and/or protected areas where culling is unfeasible or undesirable.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…While recreational hunting imposes a source of mortality to feral swine populations, hunters do not target all population demographics equally, potentially limiting the severity of population reduction (Braga et al 2010;Festa-Bianchet 2007;Keuling et al 2013;Plhal et al 2011). In contrast, a control program targets all demographics and typically is cost-effective (Engeman et al 2003(Engeman et al , 2004b(Engeman et al , 2007a(Engeman et al , b, 2010), yet it requires consistent application to be effective . Second, the efficacy of control as applied at APAFR decreased the population to a point, but did not sustain a continued decline, due primarily to limitations on the control effort during hunting seasons, permitting issues, restricted access due to military missions .…”
Section: Discussion Population Control and Damagementioning
confidence: 99%
“…Thus, reducing or preventing damage to special plant communities will likely be dependent upon repeated and unrelenting control of the feral swine population. Feral swine control has been found to be highly cost-effective elsewhere for protecting special plant communities (Engeman et al 2003(Engeman et al , 2004b(Engeman et al , 2007a, and would likely be so at APAFR if consistently applied. In Florida, feral swine are ubiquitous and pose a constant threat of immigration into nearby areas where their populations have been reduced by control efforts.…”
Section: Considerations For Protecting the Rare Plant Communities Fromentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Repair costs and restoration costs are typically used as the valuation method for damages categorized as destruction . Finally, restoration costs, rehabilitation costs, lost recreational opportunities, or nonmarket values are often used to quantify economic damages to ecosystems and wildlife (Engeman et al 2004a.…”
Section: Methods Of Valuation Primary Impactsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Damage to marshes and parks by feral swine has also been noted (Engeman et al , 2004aPimentel et al 2005), including damage to priceless archaeological sites . Another commonly reported form of property damage is vehicle collisions involving feral swine.…”
Section: Destructionmentioning
confidence: 99%