Bait acceptance by house mice: an island field trial
Ross M. Wanless A B E , Penny Fisher C , John Cooper B D , John Parkes C , Peter G. Ryan A and Martin Slabber AA Percy FitzPatrick Institute, Department of Science and Technology/National Research Foundation (DST/NRF) Centre of Excellence, University of Cape Town, Rondebosch 7701, South Africa.
B Conservation and Restoration (CORE) Initiatives, 9 Weltevreden Avenue, Rondebosch 7700, South Africa.
C Landcare Research, PO Box 40, Lincoln 7640, New Zealand.
D Animal Demography Unit, Department of Zoology, University of Cape Town, Rondebosch 7701, South Africa.
E Corresponding author. Email: rosswanless@gmail.com
Wildlife Research 35(8) 806-811 https://doi.org/10.1071/WR08045
Submitted: 21 March 2008 Accepted: 27 August 2008 Published: 16 December 2008
Abstract
Predation by introduced house mice Mus musculus on islands is one cause of decline in native birds and has deleterious impacts on other ecological aspects. Eradication of rats (Rattus spp.) from islands of up to >10 000 ha has been achieved, but for mice scale is still an issue with the largest island cleared being only 710 ha. The feasibility of eradicating mice from larger islands is being considered, and to support these assessments, we undertook a field study on Gough Island (6400 ha) to determine whether all mice would be likely to accept toxic bait. We replicated a toxic bait operation as closely as possible, in timing, probable bait density and distribution, using a bait formulation used commonly in rodent eradication operations. Baits lacked toxin but were coated with the fluorescent dye rhodamine B. Mice trapped in and around the baited areas were inspected under ultraviolet light for fluorescent marking indicative of bait consumption. Of 434 mice, 97% tested positive, including mice trapped on assessment lines up to 90 m from the closest bait. There was no difference in the proportions of unstained mice from assessment lines outside baited sites compared with mice trapped in the core baited sites, suggesting large-scale foraging movements over relatively large distances into the baited sites from surrounding, non-baited habitat. Despite the high bait densities (15.7 kg ha−1 at initial application and 7.9 kg ha−1 at second application), bait consumption rates of ~4 kg ha−1 day−1 occurred after both applications. This was much higher than expected (probably the result of large-scale movements) and meant that all baits were consumed before trapping began. Thus the 13 unstained mice trapped in the core of the baited area may have moved there after bait was consumed. Further trials are required to assess whether all unmarked mice were false negatives (not exposed to bait) or if any were true negatives (rejected bait). A separate experiment found that all 11 mice trapped in a cave had eaten bait applied aboveground around the cave’s entrances, suggesting that caves do not serve as refugia for mice and are thus unlikely to compromise an eradication attempt.
Acknowledgements
Brian Bowie and Petrus Kritzinger are thanked for their invaluable assistance in the field, Andrea Airey for laboratory work and Christine Bezar for final manuscript preparation. Fieldwork on Gough Island was undertaken by RMW and MS while working on the UK Overseas Territories Environment Program-funded ‘Managing Alien Plants on the Outer Islands’ project. Bait, shipping and equipment costs were funded by the Centre of Excellence at the Percy FitzPatrick Institute (University of Cape Town) and laboratory work was funded by Landcare Research (New Zealand). Ovenstone Agencies is thanked for transport to and from Gough Island, and logistical support at Gough Island was provided by the South African Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism through the South African National Antarctic Programme. Research was conducted with the permission of the Administrator and Island Council of Tristan da Cunha and approval of the Tristan Biodiversity Advisory Group. James Russell commented on an earlier version and Geoff Hilton and Richard Cuthbert contributed to the experimental design.
Angel, A. , Wanless, R. M. , and Cooper, J. (In press). Review of impacts of the introduced house mouse on islands in the Southern Ocean: are mice equivalent to rats? Biological Invasions ,
Cocucci, A. A. , and Sersic, A. N. (1998). Evidence of rodent pollination in Cajophora coronata (Loasaceae). Plant Systematics and Evolution 211, 113–128.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
McClelland, P. , and Tyree, P. (2002). Eradication. The clearance of Campbell. New Zealand Geographer 58, 86–94.
Towns, D. R. , and Broome, K. G. (2003). From small Maria to massive Campbell: forty years of rat eradications from New Zealand. New Zealand Journal of Zoology 30, 377–398.
Wanless, R. M. , and Wilson, J. W. (2007). Predatory behaviour of the Gough Moorhen Gallinula comeri: conservation implications. Ardea 95, 311–315.