Movement and habitat use of feral swine near domestic swine facilities

Abstract

Feral swine (Sus scrofa), a successful invasive species in the United States, have established growing populations in 38 states and are a reservoir of diseases important to domestic swine. An understanding of habitat use and movements is important for the prevention of disease transmission between feral and domestic swine. To assess risk posed to neighboring domestic swine facilities in East and South Texas, we determined habitat use and movement patterns of feral swine within 10 miles of domestic swine facilities, identified similarities in habitat preferences and vegetation types directly surrounding facilities, assessed effects of wet and dry conditions on general habitat use, and determined whether landscape features such as corridors or boundaries influenced movements across utilized habitats. Kernel area values (95% isopleths) for wet and dry periods were different (F2,16 = 6.38, P = 0.005) between East and South Texas. Feral swine preferred habitat characteristics commonly found surrounding domestic swine facilities. Feral swine also demonstrated disproportionate use of specific vegetation types as compared to availability during both wet and dry periods. Additionally, the presence of paved, 2‐lane roads influenced movements of feral swine. The new knowledge of habitat use and landscape movements we present can be used for more efficient application of targeted management and eradication strategies near domestic swine facilities, particularly in emergency situations such as disease outbreaks. Published 2012. This article is a U.S. Government work and is in the public domain in the USA.

Towards a unified generic framework to define and observe contacts between livestock and wildlife: a systematic review

“…Some methods were used to detect the presence of wild animals on farms or on pasture only, such as surveys of activity signs to detect wild boar rooting on sheep pasture ( Guillermo Bueno et al, 2010 ) and GPS collars to demonstrate the avoidance of livestock pasture by lions ( Oriol-Cotterill et al, 2015 ). Thirty studies combined more than one method to monitor wildlife, such as ( Wyckoff et al, 2012 ) which combined activity signs, GPS collar data and camera traps to monitor feral swine activity at and around domestic pig pens. The majority of studies, however, used only one method and were able to collect information about the type of contact defined by the study.…”

Timing and extent of crop damage by wild pigs (Sus scrofa Linnaeus) to corn and peanut fields

“…Fields embedded within a predominantly agricultural matrix offer limited cover for wild pigs, and wild boar have been found to limit movement between fields when there was little cover (Thurfjell et al, 2009). Similarly, paved roads represent an important source of mortality for wild pigs and wild boar (Colino-Rabanal et al, 2012, Beasley et al, 2014Saenz-de-Santa-Maria and Telleria, 2015), and individuals often avoid crossing paved roads and high-traffic areas (Wyckoff et al, 2012, Thurfjell et al, 2015.…”

Detection and persistence of environmental DNA from an invasive, terrestrial mammal

“…Aside from human-assisted movements, characteristics of wild pigs that have made them a successful invasive species include high reproductive rates (Taylor, Hellgren, Gabor, & Ilse, 1998;Waithman et al, 1999) and that they are opportunistic generalists (Fogarty, 2007;West et al, 2009). Wild pigs can inhabit a multitude of habitat types, including harsh, seemingly uninhabitable regions such as deserts and northern latitudes with long winters (Adkins & Harveson, 2007;Corn et al 2017;West et al, 2009;Wyckoff, Scott, Tyler, David, & Kurt, 2012), and due to their adaptability, suitable habitats occur throughout most of the country (Bevins, Pedersen, Lutman, Gidlewski, & Deliberto, 2014).…”