Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Landholder participation in regional-scale control of invasive predators: an adaptable landscape model

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Biological Invasions Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Control of invasive predators is necessary for the conservation of many endemic species. Invasive predator management tends to focus on priority sites, which often comprise only a small fraction of the impacted area. Landscape-scale ecological recovery requires threatening processes to be managed not only in these priority areas, but also in the matrix between them. However, wide-scale control of invasive species can be logistically, economically and socially challenging. We developed a spatially explicit model to estimate the effects of varying levels of landholder participation in landscape-scale programs to control invasive predators. We demonstrate the use of this model with a case study from the North Island of New Zealand in which the results of predator control are projected over a 6 year period. Under various scenarios for landholder participation, we estimated how the participation rate, and size and location of non-participating properties, would influence effectiveness of predator trapping. We also modelled how trap deployment could be adjusted to limit reinvasion from non-participating properties. Under all modelled scenarios, predator populations remained below pre-control levels throughout the 6 years. Non-participation by owners of small properties (≤25 ha) had a negligible effect on the efficacy of predator control. If owners of large properties (>800 ha) failed to participate, reinvasion by predators from these properties reduced the efficacy of control; however, this could be largely offset by placing additional traps on the nearest participating properties. Predator control will thus be effective even if some landholders choose not to participate. Our model can be readily adapted to other invasive species and landscapes worldwide.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Alterio N (1996) Secondary poisoning of stoats (Mustela erminea), feral ferrets (Mustela furo), and feral house cats (Felis catus) by the anticoagulant poison, brodifacoum. N Z J Zool 23:331–338

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aslan CE, Hufford MB, Epanchin-Niell RS, Port JD, Sexton JP, Waring TM (2009) Practical challenges in private stewardship of rangeland ecosystems: yellow starthistle control in Sierra Nevadan foothills. Rangel Ecol Manag 62:28–37

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bandura A (1998) Personal and collective efficacy in human adaptation and change. Adv Psychol Sci 1:51–71

    Google Scholar 

  • Barlow ND, Barron MC (2005) Modelling the dynamics and control of stoats in New Zealand forests. Sci Conserv 252:1–39

    Google Scholar 

  • Barlow ND, Norbury GL (2001) A simple model for ferret population dynamics and control in semi-arid New Zealand habitats. Wildl Res 28:87–94

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Byrom AE (2002) Dispersal and survival of juvenile ferrets Mustela furo in New Zealand. J Appl Ecol 39:67–78

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cialdini EB, Reno RR, Kallgren CA (1990) A focus theory of normative conduct: recycling the concept of norms to reduce littering in public places. J Personal Soc Pyschol 58:1015–1026

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clapperton BK, Byrom AE (2005) Feral ferret Mustela furo Linnaeus, 1758. In: King CM (ed) The handbook of New Zealand mammals, 2nd edn. Oxford University Press, Melbourne, pp 294–307

    Google Scholar 

  • Clayton R, Cowan P (2010) Management of animal and plant pests in New Zealand: patterns of control and monitoring by regional agencies. Wildl Res 37:360–371

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Corbett JB (2002) Motivations to participate in riparian improvement programs: applying the theory of planned behavior. Sci Commun 23:243–263

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cumming GS, Olsson P, Chapin F, Holling C (2013) Resilience, experimentation, and scale mismatches in social-ecological landscapes. Landscape Ecol 28:1139–1150

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Derenne P (1976) Notes sur la biologie du chat haret de Kerguelen. Mammalia 40:531–595

    Google Scholar 

  • Dickman CR (1996) Impact of exotic generalist predators on the native fauna of Australia. Wildl Biol 2:185–195

    Google Scholar 

  • Efford M (2004) Density estimation in live-trapping studies. Oikos 106:598–610

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Epanchin-Niell RS, Hufford MB, Aslan CE, Sexton JP, Port JD, Waring TM (2009) Controlling invasive species in complex social landscapes. Front Ecol Environ 8:210–216

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fowler JH, Christakis NA (2010) Cooperative behavior cascades in human social networks. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 107:5334–5338

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Gentle MN, Saunders GR, Dickman CR (2007) Poisoning for production: How effective is fox baiting in south-eastern Australia? Mammal Rev 37:177–190

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gillies CA, Fitzgerald BM (2005) Feral cat, Felis catus Linnaeus, 1758. In: King CM (ed) The handbook of New Zealand mammals, 2nd edn. Oxford University Press, Melbourne, pp 308–326

    Google Scholar 

  • Glen AS, Byrom AE (2014) Implications of landholder buy-in for the success of regional-scale predator control. Part 1: review of predator movements. Contract Report LC1956 for Hawke’s Bay Regional Council. Landcare Research, Lincoln

    Google Scholar 

  • Glen AS, Pech RP, Byrom AE (2013) Connectivity and invasive species management: towards an integrated landscape approach. Biol Invasions 15:2127–2138

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Herrerias PR, Garcia PJ, Cruz RS (2003) A note on the reasonableness of PERT hypotheses. Oper Res Lett 31:60–62

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Innes J, Kelly D, Overton JM, Gillies C (2010) Predation and other factors currently limiting New Zealand forest birds. N Z J Ecol 34:86–114

    Google Scholar 

  • Innes J, Burns B, Sanders A, Hayward MW (2015) The impact of private sanctuary networks on reintroduction programs. In: Armstrong D, Hayward M, Moro D, Seddon P (eds) Advances in reintroduction biology of Australian and New Zealand Fauna. CSIRO Publishing, Collingwood, pp 185–200

    Google Scholar 

  • Jackson T (2005) Motivating sustainable consumption: a review of evidence on consumer behavior and behavioral change. Sustainable Development Rersearch Network, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Karali E, Brunner B, Doherty R, Hersperger A, Rounsevell M (2014) Identifying the factors that influence farmer participation in environmental management practices in Switzerland. Hum Ecol 42:951–963

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kendal JR, Laland KN (2000) Mathematical models for memetics. J Memet 4. http://cfpm.org/jom-emit/2000/vol4/kendal_jr&laland_kn.html

  • King CM (1983) Mustela erminea. Mammalian Species 195:1–8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • King CM, Murphy EC (2005) Stoat Mustela erminea Linnaeus, 1758. In: King CM (ed) The handbook of New Zealand mammals, 2nd edn. Oxford University Press, Melbourne, pp 261–287

    Google Scholar 

  • Kinnear JE, Onus ML, Bromilow RN (1988) Fox control and rock-wallaby population dynamics. Aust Wildl Res 15:435–450

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Korpimäki E, Norrdahl K, Rinta-Jaskari T (1991) Responses of stoats and least weasels to fluctuating food abundances: Is the low phase of the vole cycle due to mustelid predation? Oecologia 88:552–561

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lade SJ, Tavoni A, Levin SA, Schlüter M (2013) Regime shifts in a social-ecological system. Theor Ecol 6:359–372

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MacLeod LJ, Hine DW, Please PM, Driver AB (2015) Applying behavioral theories to invasive animal management: towards an integrated framework. J Environ Manage 161:63–71

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Montanari A, Saberi A (2010) The spread of innovations in social networks. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 107:20196–20201

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Murphy EC, Dowding JE (1994) Range and diet of stoats (Mustela erminea) in a New Zealand beech forest. N Z J Ecol 18:11–18

    Google Scholar 

  • Norbury G, Byrom AE, Pech R, Smith J, Clarke D, Anderson DP, Forrester G (2013) Invasive mammals and habitat modification interact to generate unforeseen outcomes for indigenous fauna. Ecol Appl 23:1707–1721

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Norbury GL, Pech RP, Byrom AE, Innes J (2015) Density-impact functions for terrestrial vertebrate pests and indigenous biota: guidelines for conservation managers. Biol Conserv 191:409–420

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Prinbeck G, Lach D, Chan S (2011) Exploring stakeholders’ attitudes and beliefs regarding behaviors that prevent the spread of invasive species. Environ Educ Res 17:341–352

    Google Scholar 

  • Rebaudo F, Dangles O (2013) An agent-based modeling framework for integrated pest management dissemination programs. Environ Model Softw 45:141–149

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Russell JC, Innes JG, Brown PH, Byrom AE (2015) Predator-free New Zealand: conservation country. BioScience 65:520–525

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Salo P, Korpimäki E, Banks PB, Nordström M, Dickman CR (2007) Alien predators are more dangerous than native predators to prey populations. Proc R Soc Lond Ser B Biol Sci 274:1237–1243

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sanson R, Cook A, Fairweather J (2004) A study of smallholdings and their owners. MAF Information Paper No. 53. Ministry of Agriculture & Forestry, Wellington

  • Short J, Turner B (2005) Control of feral cats for nature conservation. IV. Population dynamics and morphological attributes of feral cats at Shark Bay, Western Australia. Wildl Res 32:489–501

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simberloff D (2010) Invasive species in New Zealand. In: Sodhi NS, Ehrlich PR (eds) Conservation biology for all. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 132–133

    Google Scholar 

  • Sinclair ARE (1996) Mammal populations: fluctuation, regulation, life history theory and their implications for conservation. In: Floyd RB, Sheppard AW, De Barro PJ (eds) Frontiers of population ecology. CSIRO Pubslishing, Collingwood, pp 127–154

    Google Scholar 

  • Thompson SD (1987) Body size, duration of parental care, and the intrinsic rate of natural increase in eutherian and metatherian mammals. Oecologia 71:201–209

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Aarde RJ (1984) Population biology and the control of feral cats on Marion Island. Acta Zool Fenn 172:107–110

    Google Scholar 

  • Ward-Smith T (2011) Translocations to Cape Sanctuary: What has been learnt? Notornis 58:180

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

Funding was provided by Hawke’s Bay Regional Council and the New Zealand Ministry of Business, Innovation & Employment. We thank M. Barron, P. Cowan and two anonymous referees for helpful comments on an earlier draft.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Landcare Research, Private Bag 92170, Auckland, 1142, New Zealand

    A. S. Glen

  2. Landcare Research, PO Box 69040, Lincoln, 7640, New Zealand

    M. C. Latham, D. Anderson, R. P. Pech & A. E. Byrom

  3. Hawke’s Bay Regional Council, Private Bag 6006, Napier, 4142, New Zealand

    C. Leckie

  4. School of Earth, Energy & Environmental Sciences, Stanford University, 397 Panama Mall, Mitchell Building 101, Stanford, CA, 94305-2210, USA

    R. Niemiec

Authors
  1. A. S. Glen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. M. C. Latham
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. D. Anderson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. C. Leckie
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. R. Niemiec
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. R. P. Pech
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. A. E. Byrom
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to A. S. Glen.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (DOC 1540 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Glen, A.S., Latham, M.C., Anderson, D. et al. Landholder participation in regional-scale control of invasive predators: an adaptable landscape model. Biol Invasions 19, 329–338 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10530-016-1282-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10530-016-1282-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation