Ecology and behaviour of the feral Donkey,<i>Equus asinus</i>, population of the Karpas peninsula, northern Cyprus

Reid, S. W. J.; Godley, Brendan J.; Henderson, Sheena M.; Lawrie, Gavin J.; Lloyd, D. C.; Small, Katie; Swannie, Nan; Thomas, Rachel L.

doi:10.1080/09397140.1997.10637701

Cited by 5 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Seegmiller and Ohmart (1981) reported that feral donkeys in their study ''stared intently or fled'' when alerted to the presence of human observers. Reid et al (1997) described feral donkey behavior when approached by ''non-donkey intruders'', and indicated that some donkey groups fled when approached. Neither Seegmiller and Ohmart (1981) nor Reid et al (1997) reported whether there appeared to be a threshold distance at which donkeys typically fled from intruders, or the proportion of donkeys that actually fled as opposed to simply taking an alarm stance until intruders moved a sufficient distance away from the group.…”

Section: Other Observationsmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…Reid et al (1997) described feral donkey behavior when approached by ''non-donkey intruders'', and indicated that some donkey groups fled when approached. Neither Seegmiller and Ohmart (1981) nor Reid et al (1997) reported whether there appeared to be a threshold distance at which donkeys typically fled from intruders, or the proportion of donkeys that actually fled as opposed to simply taking an alarm stance until intruders moved a sufficient distance away from the group. We assumed that (in general) donkey behavior was relatively unaffected by the presence of line transect observers since the majority of detections were from animals in an upright position.…”

Section: Other Observationsmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…To date, Reid et al (1997) reported the only known, published estimates of donkey populations in the Karpaz region. Their study utilized modified capture-recapture (re-sightings) and other subjective estimators of donkey populations and estimated the feral donkey population to be 300-400 animals (8-10 animals per km 2 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 97%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Feral donkey Equus asinus populations on the Karpaz peninsula, Cyprus

Hamrick

Pirgalioglu²,

Gündüz

et al. 2005

Eur J Wildl Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Numerous researchers have documented the adverse effects of feral donkeys Equus asinus introduced to semi-arid ecosystems. With the release of feral donkeys and potential increasing populations in natural habitats in northern Cyprus, there is concern for negative impacts on vegetation and native species. In the north of the island, there has been only one published study of feral donkey populations, and population estimators were relatively subjective. We estimated feral donkey populations on the Karpaz Peninsula using line transect surveys and quantitative distance sampling estimators. We stratified the sampling by using 11 sample units within the study area. We evaluated potential biases associated with habitat, topography, and perpendicular distance from the transect line and found that these variables did not bias donkey detections during our surveys. Using program DISTANCE, we found that a hazard rate cosine model was the best model that described our distance data based on model selection criterion (Akaike's Information Criteria adjusted for small sample bias). Estimated effective strip width was 280.19 m and detection probability was 0.47 with this model. Estimated donkey density was 6.7 donkeys/km 2 , and estimated total abundance was 800 donkeys for the entire 132.5 km 2 study area. Of 95 donkey groups detected: 16% were detected in agricultural habitats with flat topography, 9% were detected in agricultural habitats with sloped topography, 24% were detected in shrub/forest habitats with flat topography, and 51% were detected in shrub/forest habitats with sloped topography. Of 102 behavioral observations recorded (multiple behaviors were detected in groups), frequencies of behaviors were 1% bedded, 70% standing, 22% grazing, 6% moving, and 2% other. Our estimated donkey population density in the Karpaz Peninsula was >2 times densities reported in arid regions of the United States and Australia, but slightly lower than earlier density estimates reported for the Karpaz region. These estimates of feral donkey populations in the Karpaz Peninsula provide a quantitative baseline from which to make population management decisions.

show abstract

Section: Other Observationsmentioning

confidence: 98%

Section: Other Observationsmentioning

confidence: 98%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Feral donkey Equus asinus populations on the Karpaz peninsula, Cyprus

Hamrick

Pirgalioglu²,

Gündüz

et al. 2005

Eur J Wildl Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Some populations may have been living independently of humans for several decades, while in other places, free-roaming donkey populations may have only recently established [56,57]. In some areas, feral and free-roaming donkeys are able to live natural lives; they live in self-defined groups, are able to freely express their natural behaviour and adapt to local ecological conditions [58,59]. However, in other areas, they may be seen as 'pests', 'invasive species' or 'vermin' and are subject to aggressive measures for population control or eradication [53,[60][61][62].…”

Section: (D) Feral Equidsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, in other areas, they may be seen as 'pests', 'invasive species' or 'vermin' and are subject to aggressive measures for population control or eradication [53,[60][61][62]. In both contexts, feral donkeys can suffer from significant welfare problems [59] but the assessment of welfare in these contexts is lacking. The approach to assessing and understanding the welfare of these equids is outside the scope of this review, but we highlight it here and suggest it is an important area for future research, especially as competition for land and human-wildlife conflict increases [63][64][65].…”

Section: (D) Feral Equidsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Equid Assessment, Research and Scoping (EARS): The Development and Implementation of a New Equid Welfare Assessment and Monitoring Tool

Raw¹,

Rodrigues²,

Rickards³

et al. 2020

Animals

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The assessment of animal welfare poses numerous challenges, yet an emerging approach is the consolidation of existing knowledge into new frameworks which can offer standardised approaches to welfare assessment across a variety of contexts. Multiple tools exist for measuring the welfare of equids, but such tools have typically been developed for specific contexts. There is no ‘one size fits all’ which means that resulting datasets are generally non-comparable, creating a barrier to knowledge-sharing and collaboration between the many organisations working to improve equid welfare around the globe. To address this, we developed the Equid Assessment, Research and Scoping (EARS) tool, which incorporates pre-existing validated welfare assessment methods alongside new welfare indicators to deliver a larger and more comprehensive series of welfare indicators than currently exists, creating a single resource that can be used to assess equid welfare in any context. We field-trialled three welfare assessment protocols within the EARS tool, and applied these to welfare assessment of equids in a variety of contexts across nineteen countries. The EARS tool proved a useful, versatile and rapid method for collecting welfare assessment data and we collected 7464 welfare assessments in a period of fifteen months. We evaluate the EARS tool and provide ideas for future development.

show abstract