Designing a fence that enables free passage of wildlife while containing reintroduced bison: a multispecies evaluation

Laskin, David; Watt, Dillon; Whittington, Jesse; Heuer, Karsten

doi:10.2981/wlb.00751

Cited by 15 publications

(31 citation statements)

References 42 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Camera trap: installation of CT (video) to monitor specific points that are more appropriate for wildlife passage (e.g. in streams, or where underpasses are detected or signs of ungulate presence) to check interactions of non‐target species and WB with fences (Laskin et al., 2020 ). This is complemented with weekly visits to fences to check breaks caused by WB or other species, identify new underpasses and subsequent placement of CTs to monitor wildlife behaviour.…”

Section: Assessmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Research priorities to fill knowledge gaps in wild boar management measures that could improve the control of African swine fever in wild boar populations

Nielsen¹,

Álvarez²,

Bicout³

et al. 2021

EFS2

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Assessmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Research priorities to fill knowledge gaps in wild boar management measures that could improve the control of African swine fever in wild boar populations

Nielsen¹,

Álvarez²,

Bicout³

et al. 2021

EFS2

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In particular, they show that the literature on physiological consequences is especially limited in terms of energy expenditure. The few existing studies on this topic rather focus on counts of certain behaviors such as jumping (e.g., McKillop and Sibly, 1988;Harrington and Conover, 2006;Laskin et al, 2020) than on direct measurements of energetic consequences. The question of what direct energetic consequences arise from fence interactions remains unanswered.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Don't stop me now: Managed fence gaps could allow migratory ungulates to track dynamic resources and reduce fence related energy loss

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In semi-arid environments characterized by erratic rainfall and scattered primary production, migratory movements are a key survival strategy of large herbivores to track resources over vast areas. Veterinary Cordon Fences (VCFs), intended to reduce wildlife-livestock disease transmission, fragment large parts of southern Africa and have limited the movements of large wild mammals for over 60 years. Consequently, wildlife-fence interactions are frequent and often result in perforations of the fence, mainly caused by elephants. Yet, we lack knowledge about at which times fences act as barriers, how fences directly alter the energy expenditure of native herbivores, and what the consequences of impermeability are. We studied 2-year ungulate movements in three common antelopes (springbok, kudu, eland) across a perforated part of Namibia's VCF separating a wildlife reserve and Etosha National Park using GPS telemetry, accelerometer measurements, and satellite imagery. We identified 2905 fence interaction events which we used to evaluate critical times of encounters and direct fence effects on energy expenditure. Using vegetation type-specific greenness dynamics, we quantified what animals gained in terms of high quality food resources from crossing the VCF. Our results show that the perforation of the VCF sustains herbivore-vegetation interactions in the savanna with its scattered resources. Fence permeability led to peaks in crossing numbers during the first flush of woody plants before the rain started. Kudu and eland often showed increased energy expenditure when crossing the fence. Energy expenditure was lowered during the frequent interactions of ungulates standing at the fence. We found no alteration of energy expenditure when springbok immediately found and crossed fence breaches. Our results indicate that constantly open gaps did not affect energy expenditure, while gaps with obstacles increased motion. Closing gaps may have confused ungulates and modified their intended movements. While browsing, sedentary kudu's use of space was less affected by the VCF; migratory, mixed-feeding springbok, and eland benefited from gaps by gaining forage quality and quantity after crossing. This highlights the importance of access to vast areas to allow ungulates to track vital vegetation patches.

show abstract

“…2). Finding ways of titrating the flow of particular organisms and interactions may be essential to restoration in conflict and disease‐prone areas (Mysterud & Rolandsen 2019; Laskin et al 2020). In other words, it may be desirable to use the barrier effects created by infrastructure as a tool to titrate ecological flows through the landscape (Fig.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Similarly, in central Kenya, connectivity between wild and agricultural areas has intensified human—elephant conflict, with negative outcomes for livelihoods and elephant conservation (Graham et al 2010). Transboundary movement of wolves and bison is hampering conservation efforts in eastern Germany (König et al 2020) and western Canada (Hebblewhite & Whittington 2020; Laskin et al 2020), as animals cross policy boundaries that set the conditions for either coexistence or conflict. Turning on the proverbial tap of ecological connectivity will not restore ecosystems without further efforts to create landscapes of coexistence through more selective flows of wildlife.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Operationalizing process‐based restoration for terrestrial communities

Ford

2021

Restoration Ecology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Diverse perspectives in the theory and practice of restoration ecology create a productive space to continuously improve outcomes for people and biodiversity. The practical side of restoration ecology often focuses on the recovery of ecosystem structure—the habitat and organisms that create ecological communities. This structural approach has led to many successes, but falls short when it comes to accommodating both complex ecological interactions and a sustainable role for people as reciprocal agents in restoration practice. Process‐based restoration offers a complementary approach to this structural perspective. Just as structural restoration “balances a ledger” of facilitated and suppressed species based on their perceived value and role in meeting restoration goals, process‐based restoration focuses on suppressing weedy interactions and enhancing desired interactions. At least four features characterize process‐based restoration—including emphasis on the intrinsic and utilitarian values of: (1) the regenerating processes of natural disturbance; (2) functional, indirect, and trait‐mediated interactions; (3) selective connectivity to titrate the amount and types of ecological flows desired for recovery goals; and (4) an inclusive human connection with nature. These features work in concert, such as renewing the role of forest burning by Indigenous people to facilitate growth of forage plants that bolster populations of harvestable animals. With restoration becoming an increasingly vital and internationally recognized field in the coming century, a more effective and inclusive approach will be needed to conserve biodiversity and the cultures that depend on it.

show abstract

Designing a fence that enables free passage of wildlife while containing reintroduced bison: a multispecies evaluation

Abstract: BioOne Complete (complete.BioOne.org) is a full-text database of 200 subscribed and open-access titles in the biological, ecological, and environmental sciences published by nonprofit societies, associations, museums, institutions, and presses.

Cited by 15 publications

References 42 publications

Research priorities to fill knowledge gaps in wild boar management measures that could improve the control of African swine fever in wild boar populations

Research priorities to fill knowledge gaps in wild boar management measures that could improve the control of African swine fever in wild boar populations

Don't stop me now: Managed fence gaps could allow migratory ungulates to track dynamic resources and reduce fence related energy loss

Operationalizing process‐based restoration for terrestrial communities

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About