Management of wild boar in Poland

Fruzinski, B.; Łabudzki, Lesław

doi:10.1007/bf02192409

Cited by 19 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In Poland, seed production of trees and shrubs in good mast years can reach 1.92 tons/ha, whilst during years of low mast crops, only 0.15 tons/ha are produced (Faliński 1971). Beech and oak seeds are undoubtedly the most important ones for wild boars (Fruzinski and Labudzki 2002).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Winter habitat selection by wild boar Sus scrofa in southeastern Poland

Fonseca

2007

Eur J Wildl Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research was conducted on habitat selection by the wild-boar population in the Carpathian foothills, southeastern Poland. In two forest districts (Bircza and Krasiczyn) with a total area of forests of 47,000 ha, 21 line transects were designated (total length, 284 km). In February 2001, tracks that wild boar left during the day were counted on five subsequent days. Using a car mileage meter and forest maps, the locations of tracks in seven forest types, forest meadows and agricultural fields situated inside the forests were determined. The Bailey's test was applied to calculate the boars' preference for each forest type and non-forest areas. Spatial distribution of 284 wildboar tracks shows that the animals do indeed prefer European beech-hornbeam Fagus silvatica-Carpinus betulus forest and avoid silver fir Abies alba forest. The hypothesis raised is that in the European beech-hornbeam forests, there are foraging areas and bedding sites crucial for the animals.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Winter habitat selection by wild boar Sus scrofa in southeastern Poland

Fonseca

2007

Eur J Wildl Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In Spain and Portugal, even in years of abundant oak (Quercus aliena var. acuteserrata) and beech (Fagus sylvatica) seeds, crops such as maize still form a large proportion of the diet of wild boar (Fruziński and Poznań 2002;Fournier et al 1996). In Australia, wild boars are estimated to cause losses to agricultural production in the order of AU $100 million each year (Choquenot et al 1996).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…Common sources of conflict include wildlife preying upon livestock, the transfer of disease to domestic livestock or people, and damaging crops both directly and indirectly (e.g., Treves and Karanth 2003;Sukumar 1991). Many animal species across the world are known to damage crops, for example, African (Loxodonta Africana; Hoare 2000) and Asian elephants (Elephas maximus; Zhang and Wang 2003), white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) in North America (Conover and Decker 1991), vervet monkeys in Uganda (Saj et al 2001), the Eurasian Badger (Meles meles) in European (Baker et al 2005), and wild boar (Sus scrofa) in many countries (e.g., Calenge et al 2004;Choquenot et al 1996;Fernández-Llario et al 2003;Fruziński and Poznań 2002;Geisser 1998). Humanwildlife conflict arises for several reasons: (1) human population growth (Nyhus and Tilson 2004;Richard et al 2004;Vijayan and Pati 2002), (2) habitat encroachment (Balmford et al 2001;Nyhus and Tilson 2004), (3) changes in patterns of land use (Sukumar 1991;Vijayan and Pati 2002), and/or (4) implementing nature conservation measures (Fall and Jackson 1998;Messmer et al 1997;Sukumar 1991).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Factors affecting crop damage by wild boar and methods of mitigation in a giant panda reserve

et al. 2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In China, following the introduction of protection measures, wild boar (Sus scrofa) are returning to forested mountains they previously inhabited and conflict in villages near or within areas under protection has intensified. We studied this phenomenon around a giant panda nature reserve in the Qinling Mountains, China to determine the incidence and frequency of wild boar damage and methods of mitigation. Over a 3-year period, we found that almost half of households in the local village sustained crop damage, that wild boar frequently raided maize (Zea mays), potato (Ipomoea batatas), and wheat (Triticum aestivum) adjoining the reserve, and that boar usually raided croplands at night and preferred the actual crops. The distance between maize fields and mountains or a stream predicted the probability of a field being raided and also the severity of the damage. Local farmers used many methods to protect their crops; however, all were ineffective except increasing the presence of humans in fields.

show abstract

“…There are several possibilities of the wild boar population control, including poisoning, sterilization of females and trapping (Killian et al 2006;West et al 2009;Gentle 2010;Braga et al 2012) mostly used outside Europe. In Central Europe practically the only method widely used is intensive hunting (Fruzinski, Labudzki 2002). The intensity of hunting in recent years should not have allowed the wild boar population to expand.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

An assessment of the applicability of dung count to estimate the wild boar population density in a forest environment

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT:Wild boar is a native species in the fauna of the Czech Republic. It is becoming a problematic game species both in the Czech Republic and in other European countries due to its harmful impacts. So far no suitable method of its sustainable management has been devised. Yet, a correct abundance estimate is essential for proper management, field crop damage prevention and proper hunting planning. This paper employed faecal pellet group count to estimate the wild boar density in a forest environment. The research was conducted in a study area covering 12.83 km 2 , which is surrounded by farmland. The count was done under ideal conditions in early spring, after snow had melted. The study area was organised into several differing environments in which different dung densities were expected. The presence of feeding sites, where wild boars concentrated, was taken into account. The conducted count confirmed differences in the utilization of different habitats within the study area. The resulting wild boar abundance was estimated at 64.3 (± 8.9; 95% CI) indd·km -2 .

show abstract

Management of wild boar in Poland

Cited by 19 publications

References 2 publications

Winter habitat selection by wild boar Sus scrofa in southeastern Poland

Winter habitat selection by wild boar Sus scrofa in southeastern Poland

Factors affecting crop damage by wild boar and methods of mitigation in a giant panda reserve

An assessment of the applicability of dung count to estimate the wild boar population density in a forest environment

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About