“…First, in a trial at Lake Waikaremoana, New Zealand, lures containing 1% stoat anal gland secretion increased the number of visits by stoats to footprint tracking tunnels (Clapperton et al 1999). Second, in an effort to eradicate mink (Mustela vison L.) from Scottish islands with ground-nesting birds, traps baited with scent glands removed from mink were 50% more effective than fish-baited traps (Moore et al 2003). Both these examples indicate the luring potential of anal gland scent.…”
We tested scent lures made from the anal gland secretions of male and female ferrets (Mustela furo L.) at 0.1-2% concentration in "Albert", a solid, long-life, casein-based formulation, as attractants for feral ferrets in winter and spring. Live traps at 10 study sites in Canterbury and Otago lured with 2% female scent caught significantly more ferrets (1.00 per 100 corrected trap nights) than those lured with a fish-based paste (0 per 100 CTN), and at least twice as many as those lured with male scent or lower concentrations of female scent. The traps lured with the 2% female scent caught both male and female ferrets in approximately equal numbers, at a time of year when it is sometimes difficult to capture females. Capture rates of female ferrets increased with increasing female scent lure concentration, but this response was not shown by male ferrets, nor was it shown by either sex to increases in concentration of male scent lures. The results of this study have confirmed the findings of previous studies about the potential of ferret anal gland secretions as lures for ferrets. Further research is needed, using radiotelemetry, to determine what proportion of the ferret population is attracted to these lures compared with traditional rabbit meat lures, and whether this varies seasonally.
“…First, in a trial at Lake Waikaremoana, New Zealand, lures containing 1% stoat anal gland secretion increased the number of visits by stoats to footprint tracking tunnels (Clapperton et al 1999). Second, in an effort to eradicate mink (Mustela vison L.) from Scottish islands with ground-nesting birds, traps baited with scent glands removed from mink were 50% more effective than fish-baited traps (Moore et al 2003). Both these examples indicate the luring potential of anal gland scent.…”
We tested scent lures made from the anal gland secretions of male and female ferrets (Mustela furo L.) at 0.1-2% concentration in "Albert", a solid, long-life, casein-based formulation, as attractants for feral ferrets in winter and spring. Live traps at 10 study sites in Canterbury and Otago lured with 2% female scent caught significantly more ferrets (1.00 per 100 corrected trap nights) than those lured with a fish-based paste (0 per 100 CTN), and at least twice as many as those lured with male scent or lower concentrations of female scent. The traps lured with the 2% female scent caught both male and female ferrets in approximately equal numbers, at a time of year when it is sometimes difficult to capture females. Capture rates of female ferrets increased with increasing female scent lure concentration, but this response was not shown by male ferrets, nor was it shown by either sex to increases in concentration of male scent lures. The results of this study have confirmed the findings of previous studies about the potential of ferret anal gland secretions as lures for ferrets. Further research is needed, using radiotelemetry, to determine what proportion of the ferret population is attracted to these lures compared with traditional rabbit meat lures, and whether this varies seasonally.
“…Descriptions of the project can be found in Moore et al (2003) and Roy (2012). The control site in the Uists comprised approximately 356 islands and skerries totalling 850 km 2 .…”
Since escaping from fur farms in the 1950s, American mink had colonised the 2800 km 2 archipelago of the Outer Hebrides of Scotland. Between November 2001 and June 2006 the species was removed from a total of 850 km 2 of the southernmost islands, collectively named the Uists, as part of a pilot study exploring the feasibility of large scale eradication throughout the archipelago. Animals were also controlled in neighbouring South Harris (255 km 2 ) to reduce the risk of recolonisation. The project used two main methods, the operation of coastal and riparian cage traps; and trapping at breeding dens located using trained dogs. In the Uists this resulted in 100,824 trap nights over 4 years. Den searches were carried out over 500 handler-days. Overall a total of 228 mink was caught in The Uists, with the last capture in March 2005. After this date, despite a further 7 months of intensive trapping and searching effort, no further signs of mink were found and they were considered likely to have been removed from this region. In the buffer area of South Harris, 41,674 trap nights over 4 years resulted in 240 captures with few animals being caught by the end of the project. This effort greatly reduced the risk of recolonisation from this region, although there was still a possibility of extant isolated populations remaining within the region, particularly on offshore islets, which would then be detected and trapped by a follow up programme. An adaptive management process resulted in significant increases in trapping efficiency. Improvements included optimisation of trap spacing and the frequency and duration of trap-line operation; improvements in the cage designs and use of lures. The protocols developed here were used in the subsequent eradication campaign in the remainder of the Outer Hebrides.
“…We are not aware of any studies that compare live trapping capture rates with lethal traps or of studies that compare non baited traps to food baited. One study that compared the use of scent gland lure had mixed results (Moore et al 2003). Predation rate on artifi cial nests needs to be interpreted with care (Moore and Robinson 2004) and pertinent to the nesting behaviour of grebe may underestimate the risk of predation during intensive nest feeding activity during the fi rst few days after hatching (Dillon et al 2008).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Distance between each trap was 1 km allowing multiple detection possibilities within active mink territories at each checking period (Gerell 1970, Birks and Linn 1982, Reynolds et al 2010. Stations were monitored every seven days to comply with the wildlife laws and to be a suffi cient time interval to both remove individuals from a treatment area and record activity in control areas (Moore et al 2003, Asakskogen 2010. Stations were active during two periods during the ice-free season, with deployment between 26 May and 2 June as soon as ice melt began, until 21 July, and from 4 August until onset of fi rst winter ice on October 20.…”
Section: Experiments 1 Mink Removal and Activity Assessment With Raftmentioning
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.