Effect of experimental manipulation on survival and recruitment of feral pigs
Laura B. Hanson A B F , Michael S. Mitchell C , James B. Grand D , D. Buck Jolley A , Bill D. Sparklin E and Stephen S. Ditchkoff AA School of Forestry and Wildlife Sciences, Auburn University, Auburn, AL 36849, USA.
B Current address: Idaho Department of Fish and Game, PO Box 1336, Salmon, ID 83467, USA.
C U.S. Geological Survey, Montana Cooperative Wildlife Research Unit, University of Montana, Missoula, MT 59812, USA.
D U.S. Geological Survey, Alabama Cooperative Wildlife Research Unit, Auburn University, Auburn, AL 36849, USA.
E Montana Cooperative Wildlife Research Unit, University of Montana, Missoula, MT 59812, USA.
F Corresponding author. Email: laurabhanson@hotmail.com
Wildlife Research 36(3) 185-191 https://doi.org/10.1071/WR08077
Submitted: 20 May 2008 Accepted: 11 January 2009 Published: 15 April 2009
Abstract
Lethal removal is commonly used to reduce the density of invasive-species populations, presuming it reduces population growth rate; the actual effect of lethal removal on the vital rates contributing to population growth, however, is rarely tested. We implemented a manipulative experiment of feral pig (Sus scrofa) populations at Fort Benning, Georgia, USA, to assess the demographic effects of harvest intensity. Using mark–recapture data, we estimated annual survival, recruitment, and population growth rates of populations in a moderately harvested area and a heavily harvested area for 2004–06. Population growth rates did not differ between the populations. The top-ranked model for survival included a harvest intensity effect; model-averaged survival was lower for the heavily harvested population than for the moderately harvested population. Increased immigration and reproduction likely compensated for the increased mortality in the heavily harvested population. We conclude that compensatory responses in feral pig recruitment can limit the success of lethal control efforts.
Acknowledgements
We give much thanks to the Mitchell ‘wet lab’ for their support, assistance with critical thinking and comments on earlier drafts. We appreciate all who helped with fieldwork, especially B. Williams, C. Newbolt and K. Hasapes. Thank you to P. Swiderek, R. Thornton and B. Miley at the Fort Benning Conservation Branch for their ideas and support of this research. We thank E. Hellgren, B. Ackerman and two anonymous reviewers for comments on this manuscript. This research was funded by the US Department of Defense, Fort Benning Military Reservation.
Barker, R. J. (1997). Joint modeling of live–recapture, tag-resight, and tag-recovery data. Biometrics 53, 666–677.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Chao, A. (1988). Estimating animal abundance with capture frequency data. Journal of Wildlife Management 52, 295–300.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Dilustro, J. J. , Collins, B. S. , Duncan, L. K. , and Sharitz, R. R. (2002). Soil texture, land-use intensity, and vegetation of Fort Benning upland forest sites. Journal of the Torrey Botanical Society 129, 289–297.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Hone, J. , and Stone, C. P. (1989). A comparison and evaluation of feral pig management in two national parks. Wildlife Society Bulletin 17, 419–425.
Sparklin, B. D. , Mitchell, M. S. , Hanson, L. B. , Jolley, D. B. , and Ditchkoff, S. S. (in press). Territoriality of feral pigs in a highly persecuted population on Fort Benning, Georgia. Journal of Wildlife Management. ,