Wildlife Management

Adams, Clark E.

doi:10.1201/9781315371863-1

Cited by 9 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…We observed similar among‐city occupancy variability for eight other species (Figure 4). While species such as raccoon, eastern gray and fox squirrel, coyote, and white‐tailed deer are often considered quintessential urban species within their respective ranges (Adams, 2009), our analysis indicates that these species are not equally common across cities. We suggest that landscape‐level differences among cities may contribute to this phenomenon, including differences in average housing density or greenspace availability, which were found to influence urban mammals in 10 U.S. cities (Fidino et al, 2020).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 76%

Wealth and urbanization shape medium and large terrestrial mammal communities

Magle

Fidino

Sander

et al. 2021

Global Change Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 76%

Wealth and urbanization shape medium and large terrestrial mammal communities

Magle

Fidino

Sander

et al. 2021

Global Change Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, hunting is unfeasible and/or illegal in certain scenarios due to safety and/or social constraints 10 and then other management measures must be considered 11 . The urban scene faces specific challenges in managing this species because of increasing sensitivity and social demands for animal welfare considerations 12 – 14 . Fertility control 15 has been proclaimed as a more ethical alternative management measure in spite of lacking supportive evidence for its effectiveness at the population level 4 , 16 , 17 .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing mammal trapping standards in wild boar drop-net capture

Conejero

López‐Olvera

González‐Crespo

et al. 2022

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Applying contemporary trapping standards when managing wildlife should no longer be an option, but a duty. Increasing wild boar populations originate a growing number of conflicts and hunting is the only cost-effective management option in most cases. However, new scenarios where hunting is unfeasible emerge and trapping necessities cope with lacking regulatory frameworks and technical guidelines. In this research, we evaluated drop nets, a capture method not considered by the international trapping standards, to capture Eurasian wild boar (Sus scrofa), a wildlife species not included in the list of mammal species under the scope of the Agreement on International Humane Trapping Standards (AIHTS). Less than 20% of the captured wild boars presented moderate or severe injuries attributable to the capture method, hence fulfilling the acceptance thresholds of the outdated AIHTS. Based on the new standards thresholds of acceptance, the humaneness of drop-nets in our study ranged 66–78%, under the 85% required. The capture success and selectivity were 100%, as ensured by operator-driven triggering, which should be considered the main strengths of this method, together with the minimization of animal suffering owing the short duration of the stressful situation. Additionally, in spite of the socially adverse environment, with people contrary to wild boar removal, no disturbances against the capture system or operations occurred. This is the first assessment of a drop-net capture method according to internationally accepted mammal trapping standards, with unconclusive results. However, there is a need for adapted procedures and thresholds of acceptance aimed at not-mechanical traps in general, and specifically at drop-nets. Compared to other live-capture methods, drop-nets minimize the duration of the stressful situation —at the expense of a strong adrenergic acute response—, maximize the probabilities of capturing entire sounders of prosocial species, which may be also considered as more humane, and has the ability to coordinate higher values of capture success, absolute selectivity and adaptability to difficult environments.

show abstract

“…It is possible-and reasonable-to significantly amplify this capacity. Such an expansion of cohabitation will not be without problems (Adams, 1999(Adams, /2016Soulsbury & White, 2016), including the increased potential for conflict, violence and other risks including bacterial or viral exchanges that can harm both humans and nonhumans. However, potential advantages for human and, especially, nonhuman life can outweigh or cancel the risks and call for the development of knowledge and practices that can make such cohabitation possible.…”

Section: Background: the Planet In Crisismentioning

confidence: 99%

Multispecies Cohabitation and Future Design

Roudavski¹

2020

Proceedings of DRS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The ongoing COVID 19 epidemic is but one demonstration of what can happen to health and wellbeing if planning and designing do not engage with nonhuman life and whole ecosystems. This paper argues that design researchers should consider multispecies cohabitation and more-than-human cultures in all designs of future settlements. This position is inspired by existing projects for 'nonhuman clients' undertaken by the Deep Design Lab and its collaborators. These include designs of artificial replacements for bird nests (Fig. 1) (Roudavski & Parker, 2020), designs of artificial structures to replace disappearing keystone habitats such as large old trees (Fig. 2), analyses of existing trees in terms of their affordances for nonhuman life (Fig. 3) including their heritage value (Roudavski & Rutten, 2020), development of intelligent lighting systems to combat environmental light pollution (Fig. 4) as well as designs for insects, mosses and urban marine life. A recurrent theme in these projects is the need to achieve persistent modifications in behaviours, traditions, and cultures of human and nonhuman cohabitants. If the efforts to make human-populated environment more hospitable to nonhuman life will prove to be

show abstract

Wildlife Management

Cited by 9 publications

References 0 publications

Wealth and urbanization shape medium and large terrestrial mammal communities

Wealth and urbanization shape medium and large terrestrial mammal communities

Assessing mammal trapping standards in wild boar drop-net capture

Multispecies Cohabitation and Future Design

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About