Evaluation of propane exploders as white-tailed deer deterrents

Belant, Jerrold L.; Seamans, Thomas W.; Dwyer, Ciara

doi:10.1016/0261-2194(96)00027-0

Cited by 48 publications

(43 citation statements)

References 2 publications

(1 reference statement)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Mammals exposed to stimuli typically habituate if the stimuli do not provide negative reinforcement (Denniston, 1956;Altman, 1958;Belant et al, 1998). The dramatic increase in vehicle traffic in the early 1970s likely contributed to the high number of adverse reactions recorded during Tracy's 1973Tracy's -74 study (1977.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Effect of Vehicle Traffic on Wildlife in Denali National Park

Burson¹,

Belant²,

Fortier³

et al. 2000

ARCTIC

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT. We recorded observations of caribou (Rangifer tarandus), grizzly bear (Ursus arctos), Dall sheep (Ovis dalli) and moose (Alces alces) along the Denali National Park and Preserve road corridor during 1995-97. We compared these observations to similar data from previous studies to evaluate the effect of an increase in traffic on the number of animals sighted and their behavior. Between 1972 and 1997, annual visitation to Denali National Park increased from about 45 000 to 350 000, with attendant increases in traffic on the park road. The mean number of caribou, grizzly bear, and Dall sheep observed did not decline (p > 0.301) from 1973 to 1997. The number of moose observed declined by more than 50% (R 2 = 0.529, p < 0.001). The estimated population of moose also declined over the same period (R 2 = 0.374, p = 0.002). The distance from the park road at which caribou and grizzly bears were sighted did not change (p > 0.787), but fewer moose (p < 0.031) were observed within 100 m of the road and fewer sheep (p < 0.011) were observed between 400 and 500 m from the road. Adverse behavioral responses to traffic (e.g., running from vehicles) occurred in less than 1.3% of observations for each species. Increased traffic on the park road apparently has not caused significant changes in abundance, distribution, or behavior of caribou, grizzly bear, Dall sheep, and moose in the park road corridor.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Effect of Vehicle Traffic on Wildlife in Denali National Park

Burson¹,

Belant²,

Fortier³

et al. 2000

ARCTIC

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, this effect was reduced over time. Such a mild repellent effect could be explained by the fact that animals can habituate to novel stimuli (Koehler et al 1990, Belant et al 1996, Gilsdorf et al 2003; however, the effect was still greater than some previous results for small rodents (Koehler 1990, Schumake, 1995, Gilsdorf et al 2003. It should be noted that most experiments dealing with rodents have attempted to completely exclude them from their residence areas by means of pain-inducing sonic deterrents (Koehler 1990, Schumake 1995, whereas the present study only attempted to steer capybaras away from woody plants by using alarm deterrents together with an attractive food source nearby.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 91%

“…One way to slow this habituation and prolong the deterrence is to employ behavior-contingent devices that depend on the animal's presence or that are activated when the animal enters a specific area (Belant et al 1996, Shivik andMartin 2000). Various sonic devices have been shown to be effective to different degrees, especially when the shortterm deterrence of pests is required during critical periods (Koehler et al 1990, Belant et al 1996, Gilsdorf et al 2003; however, these have also utterly failed in repelling the target species (Roper and Hill 1985, Bomford and O'Brien1990, Koehler et al 1990, Belant et al 1998. In spite of attempts to exclude established rodents from their home territories, sonic devices have had variable effects and have often been ineffective (Schumake 1995, Gilsdorf et al 2003.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Can cover crops reduce rabbit‐induced damages in vineyards in southern Spain?

Barrio¹,

Villafuerte²,

Tortosa³

2012

Wildlife Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Damage caused by wildlife foraging can lead to significant agricultural losses and the problem can be further complicated if the damage-inducing animal is a valuable resource in its own right. Provision of alternative food sources such as cover crops might be a means of reducing the damage which appears to be linked to scarcity of alternative foods in intensively-managed agroecosystems. Cover crops may provide other benefits to agroecosystems, i.e. preventing soil erosion but can potentially have some undesired consequences, i.e. water competition with the cash crop. In our study, we tested the effectiveness of cover crops in reducing the damage caused by foraging European rabbit Oryctolagus cuniculus to vineyards in a semi-arid agroecosystem in southern Spain. Experimental treatments consisted of a combination of the presence/absence of sown cover crops (70% oat Avena sativa and 30% garden vetch Vicia sativa) with/without rabbit exclusion. In the 2009 growing season, we assessed rabbit-induced damage using a browsing index on vine shoots, rabbit use of plots was estimated based on faecal pellet counts and grapevine yield was measured at harvest. Rabbits ate the cover crops, and rabbit use was highest in the plots sown with the oat and vetch cover crop. However, the effect of the presence of the cover crop on the amount of damage caused by rabbits was limited and, moreover, the presence of the cover crop had a negative effect on grapevine yield. Exclosure fences effectively reduced rabbit damage by keeping rabbit densities close to zero, but even a low rabbit number (; 1 rabbit/ ha) can cause significant damage. Although cover crops provided rabbits with an alternative food source, they acted as attractants for rabbits and were not effective in reducing the damage caused to vineyards by higher rabbit numbers. Therefore, adding cover crops might not be an effective measure in controlling rabbit-induced damage in semi-arid wine-growing regions.

show abstract

“…Traditional attempts to scare animals away from fields, roads, and airports by means of ultrasonic whistles, explosionss or shooting guns have mostly been ineffective (Koehler et al 1990;Romin and Dalton 1992;Curtis et al 1997;Belant et al 1998;Ujvari et al 2004). The underlying problem is that when the warning signal is not followed by a real threat and is merely a bluff without consequence, animals will soon habituate and learn to ignore the signal (Bomford and O'Brien 1990).…”

Section: The Deterrent Systemmentioning

confidence: 99%

Wildlife Deterrent Methods for Railways—An Experimental Study

Seiler

Olsson²

2017

Railway Ecology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Since reliable accident statistics and consequent costs have become available, train collisions with wildlife, especially ungulates, have received increasing attention in Sweden. In contrast to collisions on roads, accidents involving wildlife on railways do not entail human injury or death, but can cause substantial train damage and lead to significant delays in railway traffic. Wildlife-train collisions (WTC) are rising in numbers and railways appear as a greater source of ungulate mortality per kilometer than roads. Nevertheless, railways are largely unprotected against wildlife collisions, and mitigation measures that have hitherto been applied to roads are either infeasible or economically unviable for railways. The Swedish Transport Administration is therefore seeking innovative and cost-effective measures for preventing collisions with larger wild animals. In this chapter, we present research on WTC in Sweden that has been used to define the baseline and set up criteria for a new mitigation project. This project aims to develop warning or deterring signals that encourage animals to leave the railway shortly before trains arrive. This will be carried out at several experimental crosswalks for animals along fenced railways where the effect of different signals on animal behaviour can be evaluated. If effective, these deterrent systems could replace fencing and/or crossing structures, and reduce mortality and barrier effects on wildlife. The project was begun in 2015 and will continue for at least 4 years.

show abstract

Evaluation of propane exploders as white-tailed deer deterrents

Cited by 48 publications

References 2 publications

The Effect of Vehicle Traffic on Wildlife in Denali National Park

The Effect of Vehicle Traffic on Wildlife in Denali National Park

Can cover crops reduce rabbit‐induced damages in vineyards in southern Spain?

Wildlife Deterrent Methods for Railways—An Experimental Study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About