Register      Login
Wildlife Research Wildlife Research Society
Ecology, management and conservation in natural and modified habitats
Shopping Cart: ( empty )
You are here: Home > Journals > WR > WR05110
RESEARCH ARTICLE
Contents Vol 34(6)

Effect of a synthetic lure on site visitation and bait uptake by foxes (Vulpes vulpes) and wild dogs (Canis lupus dingo, Canis lupus familiaris)

Rob J. Hunt A C , David J. Dall B and Steven J. Lapidge B
+ Author Affiliations
- Author Affiliations

A NSW Department of Environment & Climate Change, Parks and Wildlife Division, PO Box 1189, Queanbeyan, NSW 2620, Australia.

B Pestat Ltd, LPO Box 5055, University of Canberra, Bruce, ACT 2617, Australia.

C Corresponding author. Email: rob.hunt@environment.nsw.gov.au

Wildlife Research 34(6) 461-466 https://doi.org/10.1071/WR05110
Submitted: 1 December 2005  Accepted: 16 August 2007   Published: 2 November 2007

Abstract

Application of synthetic fermented egg (SFE), via aerosol, to the surface of bait stations increased site visitation by wild dogs and foxes when compared with the use of buried baits alone. An associated increase in bait uptake by foxes at SFE-treated bait stations was observed when compared with bait uptake at untreated stations, although this effect diminished with time, possibly due to the use of non-lethal baits leading to the discovery of all bait stations and the habituation of animals to sites of reward. Bait uptake by wild dogs, although limited, occurred only at stations treated with SFE. Use of an aerosol based form of SFE allowed an ease of field application not previously associated with the use of synthetic lures.


Acknowledgements

The authors thank Geoff Deeble for initial production of SFE, Karyn Austin and Nicki Endt for field assistance, Simon Barry for statistical analysis and Peter Catling, Andrew Claridge, Doug Mills and two anonymous referees for comments on the manuscript. Field research was approved by the NSW National Parks & Wildlife Research Consent No. RC 01/2003, Department of Environment and Conservation Animal Ethics permit No. 031215/05 and ACT Parks & Conservation Namadgi Research Permit No. 358. FOXOFF® is a registered trademark of Animal Control Technologies Australia Pty Ltd; FeralMone® is a registered trademark of Pestat Ltd.


References

Allen, L. , Engeman, R. , and Krupa, H. (1996). Evaluation of three relative abundance indices for assessing dingo populations. Wildlife Research 23, 197–206.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | Fleming P., Corbett L., Harden R., and Thomson P. (2001). ‘Managing the Impacts of Dingoes and Other Wild Dogs.’ (Bureau of Rural Sciences: Canberra.)

Glen, A. S. , and Dickman, C. R. (2003a). Monitoring bait removal in vertebrate pest control: a comparison using track identification and remote photography. Wildlife Research 30, 29–33.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | Linhart S. B., Dasch G. J., Roberts J. D., and Savarie P. J. (1977). Test methods for determining the efficacy of coyote attractants and repellents. In ‘Test Methods for Vertebrate Pest Control and Management Materials’. ASTM STP 625. (Eds W. B. Jackson and R. E. Marsh.) pp. 114–122. (American Society of Testing Materials.)

McCulloch C. E., and Searle S. R. (2001). ‘Generalized, Linear, and Mixed Models.’ (Wiley: New York.)

McIlroy, J. C. , Cooper, R. J. , Gifford, E. J. , Green, B. F. , and Newgrain, K. W. (1986). The effect on wild dogs, Canis f. familiaris, of 1080-poisoning campaigns in Kosciusko National Park, N.S.W. Australian Wildlife Research 13, 535–544.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | Phillips R. L., Blom F. S., and Engeman R. M. (1990). Responses of captive coyotes to chemical attractants. In ‘Proceedings of the Vertebrate Pest Conference’. (Eds L. R. Davis and R. E. Marsh.) pp. 285–289. (University of California: Davis, CA.)

Roughton, R. D. (1982). A synthetic alternative to fermented egg as a canid attractant. Journal of Wildlife Management 46, 230–234.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | Roughton R. D., and Bowden D. C. (1979). Experimental design for field evaluation of odor attractants for predators. In ‘Test Methods for Vertebrate Pest Control and Management Materials’. ASTM STP 680. (Ed. J. R. Beck.) pp. 249–254. (American Society of Testing Materials.)

Saunders, G. , and Harris, S. (2000). Evaluation of attractants and bait preferences of captive red foxes, Vulpes vulpes. Australian Wildlife Research 27, 237–243.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | Saunders G., Coman B., Kinnear J., and Braysher M. (1995). ‘Managing Vertebrate Pests: Foxes.’ (Australian Government Printing Service: Canberra.)

Saunders, G. , Kay, B. , and McLeod, L. (1999). Caching of baits by foxes (Vulpes vulpes) on agricultural lands. Australian Wildlife Research 26, 335–340.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | Turkowski F. J., Popelka M. L., Green B. B., and Bullard R. W. (1979). Testing the responses of coyotes and other predators to odor attractants. In ‘Vertebrate Pest Control and Management Materials’. (Ed. J. R. Beck.) pp. 255–269. (American Society for Testing and Materials.)

Turkowski, F. J. , Popelka, M. L. , and Bullard, R. W. (1983). Efficacy of odor lures and baits for coyotes. Wildlife Society Bulletin 11, 136–145.


van Polanen Petel, A. M. , Marks, C. A. , and Morgan, D. G. (2001). Bait palatability influences the caching behaviour of the red fox, Vulpes vulpes. Australian Wildlife Research 28, 395–401.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |