Using detection dogs for surveillance of invasive dama wallaby (Notamacropus eugenii) in North Island, New Zealand

A. David M. Latham; M. Cecilia Latham; Jo Peace; Andrew M. Gormley

doi:10.1071/WR24026

RESEARCH ARTICLE (Open Access)

Previous Next Contents Vol 51(7)

Using detection dogs for surveillance of invasive dama wallaby (Notamacropus eugenii) in North Island, New Zealand

A. David M. Latham

^A ^* , M. Cecilia Latham

^A , Jo Peace ^B and Andrew M. Gormley

^A

+ Author Affiliations

- Author Affiliations

^A Manaaki Whenua – Landcare Research, PO Box 69040, Lincoln 7640, New Zealand.

^B Manaaki Whenua – Landcare Research, Private Bag 92170, Auckland 1142, New Zealand.

^* Correspondence to: lathamd@landcareresearch.co.nz

Handling Editor: Tom Sullivan

Wildlife Research 51, WR24026 https://doi.org/10.1071/WR24026

Submitted: 26 February 2024 Accepted: 22 June 2024 Published: 11 July 2024

© 2024 The Author(s) (or their employer(s)). Published by CSIRO Publishing. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC-ND)

Abstract

Context

Dama wallabies (Notamacropus eugenii) were introduced into the Bay of Plenty Region, New Zealand, in the early 1900s. They subsequently became an invasive pest, damaging pasture, silviculture, and native vegetation. One key management strategy is the eradication of isolated populations.

Aims

First, we empirically determined the detection probabilities of detection dogs and handlers searching for faecal pellet groups of dama wallaby in pasture and forested habitats. Second, we used detection probabilities to derive surveillance system sensitivity (SSe) and estimate the cost per hectare required to have a high confidence (95%) that a targeted wallaby population has been eradicated.

Methods

We collected and deployed faecal pellet groups in an area with no naturally occurring wallabies. Following faecal pellet surveys by detection dogs and handlers, we estimated the probability of a dog–handler team detecting a pellet group and derived SSe. We derived SSe for a single faecal pellet group and, using simulation, upscaled this estimate to multiple pellet groups voided by a single surviving individual.

Key results

The detection probability of dogs searching for a single faecal pellet group that was within the detection swathe was relatively high (minimum of 45%). Scaling this instantaneous probability of detection for a single pellet group to the multiple pellet groups voided by a single wallaby around its home range resulted in 30–33-fold increases in SSe compared to the sensitivity of searching for a single faecal pellet group. The costs of surveillance for confirming eradication using detection dogs and handlers are NZ$54–NZ$72 for a 100-ha area.

Conclusions

Detection dogs and handlers are an efficacious and cost-effective surveillance method for confirming eradication of dama wallaby in open and forested habitats.

Implications

Detection dogs and handlers are an important surveillance tool for the management of wallabies in New Zealand. The data from this study enable managers to determine the required surveillance effort to have high confidence (e.g. 0.95) that a wallaby population has been eradicated, or that a suspected new population is actually absent if no wallabies are detected. Additionally, it enables per hectare costs of surveillance to be estimated and compared to alternative methods.

Keywords: damage, decision making, faecal pellet surveys, Macropodidae, pest management, proof of eradication, surveillance system sensitivity, survey effort, tammar wallaby, vertebrate pests.

References

Anderson DP, Ramsey DSL, Nugent G, Bosson M, Livingstone P, Martin PAJ, Sergeant E, Gormley AM, Warburton B (2013) A novel approach to assess the probability of disease eradication from a wild-animal reservoir host. Epidemiology and Infection 141, 1509-1521.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |

Anderson DP, Pepper MA, Travers S, Michaels TA, Sullivan K, Ramsey DSL (2022) Confirming the broadscale eradication success of nutria (Myocastor coypus) from the Delmarva Peninsula, USA. Biological Invasions 24, 3509-3521.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |

Cablk ME, Sagebiel JC, Heaton JS, Valentin C (2008) Olfaction-based detection distance: a quantitative analysis of how far away dogs recognize tortoise odor and follow it to source. Sensors 8, 2208-2222.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |

Caughley G (1977) Sampling in aerial survey. The Journal of Wildlife Management 41, 605-615.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |

Cilulko J, Janiszewski P, Bogdaszewski M, Szczygielska E (2013) Infrared thermal imaging in studies of wild animals. European Journal of Wildlife Research 59, 17-23.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |

Clare JDJ, Anderson EM, Macfarland DM, Sloss BL (2015) Comparing the costs and detectability of bobcat using scat-detecting dog and remote camera surveys in central Wisconsin. Wildlife Society Bulletin 39, 210-217.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |

Dolman PM, Wäber K (2008) Ecosystem and competition impacts of introduced deer. Wildlife Research 35, 202-214.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |

Donlan CJ, Tershy BR, Campbell K, Cruz F (2003) Research for requiems: the need for more collaborative action in eradication of invasive species. Conservation Biology 17, 1850-1851.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |

Efford MG, Dawson DK, Jhala YV, Qureshi Q (2016) Density-dependent home-range size revealed by spatially explicit capture–recapture. Ecography 39, 676-688.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |

Eldridge MDB, Coulson GM (2015) Family Macropodidae (kangaroos and wallabies). In ‘Handbook of mammals of the world. Vol. 5’. (Eds DE Wilson, RA Mittermeier) pp. 630–735. (Lynx Edicions: Barcelona, Spain)

English HM, Caravaggi A (2020) Where’s wallaby? Using public records and media reports to describe the status of red-necked wallabies in Britain. Ecology and Evolution 10, 12949-12959.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |

Glen AS, Veltman CJ (2018) Search strategies for conservation detection dogs. Wildlife Biology 2018, 1-9.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |

Glen AS, Russell JC, Veltman CJ, Fewster RM (2018) I smell a rat! Estimating effective sweep width for searches using wildlife-detector dogs. Wildlife Research 45, 500-504.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |

Gormley AM, Holland EP, Barron MC, Anderson DP, Nugent G (2016) A modelling framework for predicting the optimal balance between control and surveillance effort in the local eradication of tuberculosis in New Zealand wildlife. Preventive Veterinary Medicine 125, 10-18.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |

Green SJ, Tamburello N, Miller SE, Akins JL, Côté IM (2013) Habitat complexity and fish size affect the detection of Indo-Pacific lionfish on invaded coral reefs. Coral Reefs 32, 413-421.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |

Havens KJ, Sharp EJ (2016) ‘Thermal imaging techniques to survey and monitor animals in the wild: a methodology.’ (Elsevier: Amsterdam, Netherlands)

Havlin P, Caravaggi A, Montgomery WI (2018) The distribution and trophic ecology of an introduced, insular population of red-necked wallabies (Notamacropus rufogriseus). Canadian Journal of Zoology 96, 357-365.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |

Hone J (2007) ‘Wildlife damage control.’ (CSIRO Publishing: Melbourne, Vic, Australia)

Johnson CN, Jarman PJ, Southwell CJ (1987) Macropod studies at Wallaby Creek. 5. Patterns of defecation by eastern gray kangaroos and red-necked wallabies. Australian Wildlife Research 14, 133-138.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |

Jones HP, Holmes ND, Butchart SHM, Tershy BR, Kappes PJ, Corkery I, Aguirre-Muñoz A, Armstrong DP, Bonnaud E, Burbidge AA, Campbell K, Courchamp F, Cowan PE, Cuthbert RJ, Ebbert S, Genovesi P, Howald GR, Keitt BS, Kress SW, Miskelly CM, Oppel S, Poncet S, Rauzon MJ, Rocamora G, Russell JC, Samaniego-Herrera A, Seddon PJ, Spatz DR, Towns DR, Croll DA (2016) Invasive mammal eradication on islands results in substantial conservation gains. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 113, 4033-4038.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |

Kays R, Sheppard J, Mclean K, Welch C, Paunescu C, Wang V, Kravit G, Crofoot M (2019) Hot monkey, cold reality: surveying rainforest canopy mammals using drone-mounted thermal infrared sensors. International Journal of Remote Sensing 40, 407-419.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |

Latham ADM, Latham MC, Warburton B (2019) Current and predicted future distributions of wallabies in mainland New Zealand. New Zealand Journal of Zoology 46, 31-47.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |

Latham ADM, Latham MC, Norbury GL, Forsyth DM, Warburton B (2020) A review of the damage caused by invasive wild mammalian herbivores to primary production in New Zealand. New Zealand Journal of Zoology 47, 20-52.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |

Latham ADM, Warburton B (2021) Notamacropus eugenii, N. r. rufogriseus, N. parma, N. dorsalis, Petrogale penicillata, Wallabia bicolor. Family Macropodidae. In ‘The handbook of New Zealand mammals’. 3rd edn. (Eds CM King, DM Forsyth) pp. 1–26. (CSIRO Publishing: Melbourne, Australia)

Latham ADM, Warburton B, Latham MC, Anderson DP, Howard SW, Binny RN (2021) Detection probabilities and surveillance sensitivities for managing an invasive mammalian herbivore. Ecosphere 12, e03772.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |

Lazell JD, Jr, Sutterfield RW, Giezentanner WD (1984) The population of rock wallabies (genus Petrogale) on Oahu, Hawaii. Biological Conservation 30, 99-108.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |

Macdonald N, Nugent G, Edge K-A, Parkes JP (2019) Eradication of red deer from Secretary Island, New Zealand: changing tactics to achieve success. In ‘Island invasives: scaling up to meet the challenge’. Occasional Paper SSC no. 62. (Eds CR Veitch, MN Clout, AR Martin, JC Russell, CJ West) pp. 256–260. (IUCN: Gland, Switzerland)

Mackenzie HR, Latham MC, Anderson DP, Hartley S, Norbury GL, Latham ADM (2022) Detection parameters for managing invasive rats in urban environments. Scientific Reports 12, 16520.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |

Meek PD, Ballard G-A, Fleming PJS (2015) The pitfalls of wildlife camera trapping as a survey tool in Australia. Australian Mammalogy 37, 13-22.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |

Murphy EC, Russell JC, Broome KG, Ryan GJ, Dowding JE (2019) Conserving New Zealand’s native fauna: a review of tools being developed for the Predator Free 2050 programme. Journal of Ornithology 160, 883-892.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |

Nugent G, Gormley AM, Anderson DP, Crews K (2018) Roll-back eradication of bovine tuberculosis (TB) from wildlife in New Zealand: concepts, evolving approaches, and progress. Frontiers in Veterinary Science 5, 277.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |

Oliveira MLd, Norris D, Ramírez JFM, Peres PHdF, Galetti M, Duarte JMB (2012) Dogs can detect scat samples more efficiently than humans: an experiment in a continuous Atlantic Forest remnant. Zoologia (Curitiba) 29, 183-186.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |

Parkes J, Murphy E (2003) Management of introduced mammals in New Zealand. New Zealand Journal of Zoology 30, 335-359.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |

Putman RJ, Moore NP (1998) Impact of deer in lowland Britain on agriculture, forestry and conservation habitats. Mammal Review 28, 141-164.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |

Ramsey DSL, Parkes J, Morrison SA (2009) Quantifying eradication success: the removal of feral pigs from Santa Cruz Island, California. Conservation Biology 23, 449-459.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |

Relva MA, Nuñez MA, Simberloff D (2010) Introduced deer reduce native plant cover and facilitate invasion of non-native tree species: evidence for invasional meltdown. Biological Invasions 12, 303-311.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |

Robe RQ, Frost JR (2002) A method for determining effective sweep widths for land searches: procedures for conducting detection experiments. Potomac Management Group: Alexandria, Virginia, USA.

Robertson PA, Adriaens T, Lambin X, Mill A, Roy S, Shuttleworth CM, Sutton-Croft M (2017) The large-scale removal of mammalian invasive alien species in Northern Europe. Pest Management Science 73, 273-279.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |

Russell JC, Innes JG, Brown PH, Byrom AE (2015) Predator-free New Zealand: conservation country. BioScience 65, 520-525.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |

Smith DA, Ralls K, Cypher BL, Maldonado JE (2005) Assessment of scat-detection dog surveys to determine kit fox distribution. Wildlife Society Bulletin 33, 897-904.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |

Swann DE, Hass CC, Dalton DC, Wolf SA (2004) Infrared-triggered cameras for detecting wildlife: an evaluation and review. Wildlife Society Bulletin 32, 357-365.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |

Tobin PC, Kean JM, Suckling DM, McCullough DG, Herms DA, Stringer LD (2014) Determinants of successful arthropod eradication programs. Biological Invasions 16, 401-414.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |

Towns DR, Broome KG (2003) From small Maria to massive Campbell: forty years of rat eradications from New Zealand islands. New Zealand Journal of Zoology 30, 377-398.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |

Wallace SW, Wallace G (1995) The impact of dama wallaby (Macropus eugenii) on forest understoreys in Lake Okataina Scenic Reserve. Unpublished Report. Department of Conservation, Rotorua, New Zealand.

Warburton B (1986) Wallabies in New Zealand: history, current status, research, and management needs. Forest Research Institute Bulletin 114, 1-29.
| Google Scholar |

Wiggins NL, Bowman DMJS (2011) Macropod habitat use and response to management interventions in an agricultural–forest mosaic in north-eastern Tasmania as inferred by scat surveys. Wildlife Research 38, 103-113.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |

Wodzicki K, Flux JEC (1967) Guide to introduced wallabies in New Zealand. Tuatara 15, 47-59.
| Google Scholar |

Wright S (2017) The impact of dama wallaby (Macropus eugenii) and red deer (Cervus elaphus) on forest understorey in the Lake Okataina Scenic Reserve – 2017 update. Unpublished report: DOC-3223478. Department of Conservation, Wellington, New Zealand.