Effect of Coyote Removal on Sheep Depredation in Northern California

Conner, Mary M.; Jaeger, Michael M.; Weller, Theodore J.; McCullough, Dale R.

doi:10.2307/3802345

Cited by 101 publications

(55 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…When relying on traditional, lethal predator control tools and methods, such as traps, snares and shooting, we commonly removed 10 to 20 or more coyotes annually from HREC property (Conner et al 1998). While using the LPC as our primary control tool, we removed an average of about six coyotes per year, although an exact count is difficult because most coyotes killed by LPCs are not found.…”

Section: Livestock Protection Collarmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sheep-killing coyotes a continuing dilemma for ranchers

Timm¹,

Connolly²

2001

Cal Ag

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Livestock Protection Collarmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sheep-killing coyotes a continuing dilemma for ranchers

Timm¹,

Connolly²

2001

Cal Ag

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Increases in conflict following episodic predator culls/harvesting are not always observed, but have been recorded in dingoes (Wallach et al 2009;Allen 2014Allen , 2015, wolves (Fernández-Gil et al 2016), cougars, Puma concolor (Gross 2008;Peebles et al 2013), coyotes (Conner et al 1998), jackals, Canis mesomelas (McManus et al 2015) and black bears, Ursus americanus (Treves et al 2010). As discussed below, following a major dingo cull on Fraser Island in 2001, human-dingo conflict rose markedly, with the number of incidents eventually reaching an asymptote in 2004 (Fig.…”

Section: The Ecological Consequences Of Lethal Control Can Potentiallmentioning

confidence: 99%

Managing dingoes on Fraser Island: culling, conflict, and an alternative

O’Neill¹,

Cairns

Kaplan

et al. 2017

Pac. Conserv. Biol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Globally, the role of large predators is increasingly understood as essential for the restoration and maintenance of ecosystems. Consequently, predator conservation represents a paradigm shift in ecological thinking, yet the management of predators sets conflicting goals because of ongoing conflict with humans. This is exemplified on Fraser Island where dingoes come into conflict with tourists, and dingoes perceived to be dangerous are regularly culled. It is argued here that this new conservation paradigm premised on protecting predators in conjunction with conventional wildlife management can result in predator populations being held in a perpetual state of social disorder, exacerbating rather than alleviating conflict. We consider the intensity and frequency of lethal control and how this may impact upon predator social structures, healthy ecological function, stable breeding patterns and stable territoriality. The direct effects of management-induced psychological stress for the survivors of episodic culls are discussed, as well as the indirect flowon effects of social dysfunction. A final consideration is the cyclical nature of lethal control, whereby conflict with humans results in culling which, in turn, gives rise to further social disruption and conflict. In part, our assessment is derived from official data collected in the course of the management of dingoes on Fraser Island. On this basis, and on the basis of the international literature available, we offer new insights, which may inform predator management more broadly.

show abstract

“…Predator control is considered as one of the oldest and most widespread wildlife management tools in the world (Murie, 1940). Although several predator-management programs exist (Hone, 1994;Cote and Sutherland, 1997), but only a few works have been devoted to analyze the effectiveness of control strategies (Hone, 1994;Cote and Sutherland, 1997;Conner et al, 1998). The success of predator control is most often judged by an increase in prey abundance (Conner et al, 1998;Boggess et al, 1990).…”

Section: Some Real World Applicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Although several predator-management programs exist (Hone, 1994;Cote and Sutherland, 1997), but only a few works have been devoted to analyze the effectiveness of control strategies (Hone, 1994;Cote and Sutherland, 1997;Conner et al, 1998). The success of predator control is most often judged by an increase in prey abundance (Conner et al, 1998;Boggess et al, 1990). Now, if the prey population is affected by a disease, then it would be beneficial to introduce a predator with moderate to high interference strength (depending on carrying capacity) which will decrease the infected prey and ultimately there will be an increase in the susceptible prey abundance.…”

Section: Some Real World Applicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%