How to prioritize rat management for the benefit of petrels: a case study of the UK, Channel Islands and Isle of Man

Ratcliffe, Norman; Mitchell, Ian; Varnham, Karen; Verboven, Nanette; Higson, Paul

doi:10.1111/j.1474-919x.2009.00949.x

Cited by 20 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 24 publications

(28 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, these reviews included studies from oceanic islands, inhabited by predator-naïve and flightless prey which suffered heavy predation by non-native predators (Jones et al, 2011), alongside mainland predator-prey interactions, which have evolved over long timescales. Our review focused on predator-prey interactions in a smaller geographical area dominated by predator-prey interactions that have probably evolved over a long time period, with only a few relatively novel interactions caused by deliberate or accidental introductions of non-native species (Craik, 1997;Jackson et al, 2004;Ratcliffe et al, 2009). Our results confirm that formal experimental studies that removed predators often resulted in higher breeding numbers of seabirds and gamebirds, and to some extent also waders (Fig.…”

Section: (3) Species Groups Limited By Predationsupporting

confidence: 74%

“…2). Further examination of our results suggests that it is generalist predators (Foxes and Crows;MacDonald & Bolton, 2008;Fletcher et al, 2010) and introduced non-native predators (Brown Rat, American Mink and Hedgehog; the latter introduced to some Scottish islands; Craik, 1997;Jackson, 2001;Jackson et al, 2004;Ratcliffe et al, 2009) that limit these prey species (Fig. 4).…”

Section: (3) Species Groups Limited By Predationmentioning

confidence: 77%

“…Atkinson, 1996;Jones et al, 2011). However, seabirds often re-colonise these islands if the non-native predators are eradicated (Towns & Broome, 2003;Ratcliffe et al, 2009Ratcliffe et al, , 2010. Two experimental studies explicitly showed that lethal removal of generalist predators increased breeding success and population size in both autumn and the following spring of Grey Partridge Perdix perdix as well as Red Grouse and several wader species (Tapper, Potts, & Brockless, 1996;Fletcher et al, 2010).…”

Section: (3) Species Groups Limited By Predationmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

A review of predation as a limiting factor for bird populations in mesopredator‐rich landscapes: a case study of the UK

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The impact of increasing vertebrate predator numbers on bird populations is widely debated among the general public, game managers and conservationists across Europe. However, there are few systematic reviews of whether predation limits the population sizes of European bird species. Views on the impacts of predation are particularly polarised in the UK, probably because the UK has a globally exceptional culture of intensive, high-yield gamebird management where predator removal is the norm. In addition, most apex predators have been exterminated or much depleted in numbers, contributing to a widely held perception that the UK has high numbers of mesopredators. This has resulted in many high-quality studies of mesopredator impacts over several decades. Here we present results from a systematic review of predator trends and abundance, and assess whether predation limits the population sizes of 90 bird species in the UK. Our results confirm that the generalist predators Red Fox (Vulpes vulpes) and Crows (Corvus corone and C. cornix) occur at high densities in the UK compared with other European countries. In addition, some avian and mammalian predators have increased numerically in the UK during recent decades. Despite these high and increasing densities of predators, we found little evidence that predation limits populations of pigeons, woodpeckers and passerines, whereas evidence suggests that ground-nesting seabirds, waders and gamebirds can be limited by predation. Using life-history characteristics of prey species, we found that mainly long-lived species with high adult survival and late onset of breeding were limited by predation. Single-brooded species were also more likely to be limited by predation than multi-brooded species. Predators that depredate prey species during all life stages (i.e. from nest to adult stages) limited prey numbers more than predators that depredated only specific life stages (e.g. solely during the nest phase). The Red Fox and non-native mammals (e.g. the American Mink Neovison vison) were frequently identified as numerically limiting their prey species. Our review has identified predator-prey interactions that are particularly likely to result in population declines of prey species. In the short term, traditional predator-management techniques (e.g. lethal control or fencing to reduce predation by a small number of predator species) could be used to protect these vulnerable species. However, as these techniques are costly and time-consuming, we advocate that future research should identify land-use practices and landscape configurations that would reduce predator numbers and predation rates.

show abstract

Section: (3) Species Groups Limited By Predationsupporting

confidence: 74%

Section: (3) Species Groups Limited By Predationmentioning

confidence: 77%

Section: (3) Species Groups Limited By Predationmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A review of predation as a limiting factor for bird populations in mesopredator‐rich landscapes: a case study of the UK

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Similar to systematic conservation planning for the location of reserves (Sarkar et al 2006), an established approach to prioritize islands where an eradication would achieve the greatest net benefit for extant biodiversity is an analytical comparison of the costs and benefits of eradicating invasive alien vertebrates. So far, however, these eradication prioritizations have either focused on a small set of native taxa such as birds (Brooke et al 2007b;Ratcliffe et al 2009;Capizzi et al 2010) or on small spatial scales (Harris et al 2012).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Prioritizing islands for the eradication of invasive vertebrates in the United Kingdom overseas territories

Dawson

Oppel

Cuthbert

et al. 2014

Conservation Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Invasive alien species are one of the primary threats to native biodiversity on islands worldwide. Consequently, eradicating invasive species from islands has become a mainstream conservation practice. Deciding which islands have the highest priority for eradication is of strategic importance to allocate limited resources to achieve maximum conservation benefit. Previous island prioritizations focused either on a narrow set of native species or on a small geographic area. We devised a prioritization approach that incorporates all threatened native terrestrial vertebrates and all invasive terrestrial vertebrates occurring on 11 U.K. overseas territories, which comprise over 2000 islands ranging from the sub-Antarctic to the tropics. Our approach includes eradication feasibility and distinguishes between the potential and realistic conservation value of an eradication, which reflects the benefit that would accrue following eradication of either all invasive species or only those species for which eradication techniques currently exist. We identified the top 25 priority islands for invasive species eradication that together would benefit extant populations of 155 native species including 45 globally threatened species. The 5 most valuable islands included the 2 World Heritage islands Gough (South Atlantic) and Henderson (South Pacific) that feature unique seabird colonies, and Anegada, Little Cayman, and Guana Island in the Caribbean that feature a unique reptile fauna. This prioritization can be rapidly repeated if new information or techniques become available, and the approach could be replicated elsewhere in the world.

show abstract

“…Researchers are increasingly developing prioritization algorithms to help guide decision-making on which islands should be targeted for restoration via invasive mammal removal (de L. Brooke et al 2007;Ratcliffe et al 2009;Capizzi et al 2010;Harris et al 2012). Yet, the economic costs of invasive mammal eradication have yet to be accurately incorporated into prioritizations due to the challenges around a lack of data and the complexities of costing.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Maximizing Return on Investment for Island Restoration and Species Conservation

Donlan

Luque

Wilcox

2014

CONSERVATION LETTERS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Conservation practitioners are increasingly embracing evidence-based and return on investment (ROI) approaches. Much evidence now exists that documents island biodiversity impacts by invasive mammals. The technical ability to eradicate invasive mammals from islands has increased exponentially; consequently, strategic planning focused on maximizing the ROI is now a limiting factor for island restoration. We use a regional ROI approach to prioritize eradications on islands for seabird conservation in British Columbia, Canada. We do so by integrating economic costs of interventions and applying a resource allocation approach. We estimate the optimal set of islands for eradication under two conservation objectives each with a series of increasing thresholds of population sizes and breeding locations. Our approach (1) identified the most cost-effective interventions, (2) determined whether or not those interventions were nested with increasing thresholds, and (3) helped justify larger investments when appropriate. More often than not, conservation decisions are made at a regional scale, and decision-makers often must make choices on how to allocate funds across a number of potential conservation actions. A regional, ROI framework can serve as a decision-support tool for organizations engaging in discrete interventions in order to maximize benefits for the minimum cost.

show abstract

How to prioritize rat management for the benefit of petrels: a case study of the UK, Channel Islands and Isle of Man

Cited by 20 publications

References 24 publications

A review of predation as a limiting factor for bird populations in mesopredator‐rich landscapes: a case study of the UK

A review of predation as a limiting factor for bird populations in mesopredator‐rich landscapes: a case study of the UK

Prioritizing islands for the eradication of invasive vertebrates in the United Kingdom overseas territories

Maximizing Return on Investment for Island Restoration and Species Conservation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About