Biodiversity and Conservation

, Volume 19, Issue 3, pp 725–743 | Cite as

Abundance and habitat preferences of the southernmost population of mink: implications for managing a recent island invasion

  • Elke Schüttler
  • José Tomás Ibarra
  • Bernd Gruber
  • Ricardo Rozzi
  • Kurt Jax
Original Paper

Abstract

Since 2001 invasive American mink has been known to populate Navarino Island, an island located in the pristine wilderness of the Cape Horn Biosphere Reserve, Chile, lacking native carnivorous mammals. As requested by scientists and managers, our study aims at understanding the population ecology of mink in order to respond to conservation concerns. We studied the abundance of mink in different semi-aquatic habitats using live trapping (n = 1,320 trap nights) and sign surveys (n = 68 sites). With generalized linear models we evaluated mink abundance in relation to small-scale habitat features including habitats engineered by invasive beavers (Castor canadensis). Mink have colonized the entire island and signs were found in 79% of the surveys in all types of semi-aquatic habitats. Yet, relative population abundance (0.75 mink/km of coastline) was still below densities measured in other invaded or native areas. The habitat model accuracies indicated that mink were generally less specific in habitat use, probably due to the missing limitations normally imposed by predators or competitors. The selected models predicted that mink prefer to use shrubland instead of open habitat, coastal areas with heterogeneous shores instead of flat beaches, and interestingly, that mink avoid habitats strongly modified by beavers. Our results indicate need for immediate mink control on Navarino Island. For this future management we suggest that rocky coastal shores should be considered as priority sites deserving special conservation efforts. Further research is needed with respect to the immigration of mink from adjacent islands and to examine facilitating or hampering relationships between the different invasive species present, especially if integrative management is sought.

Keywords

Capture-mark-recapture Castor canadensis Chile Exotic species Management Neovison vison Population size Sign surveys Trapping Wetlands 

Abbreviations

GLMs

Generalized linear models

PCA

Principal component analysis

References

  1. Ahola M, Nordström M, Banks PB, Laanetu N, Korpimäki E (2006) Alien mink predation induces prolonged declines in archipelago amphibians. Proc R Soc B 273:1261–1265CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Akaike H (1973) Information theory as an extension of the maximum likelihood principle. Paper presented at the 2nd international symposium on information theory, Akademiai Kiado, Budapest, HungaryGoogle Scholar
  3. Allen AW (1984) Habitat suitability index models: mink: U.S. Fish Wildlife Service, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  4. Anderson CB, Rozzi R, Torres-Mura JC, McGehee SM, Sherriffs MF, Schüttler E, Rosemond AD (2006a) Exotic vertebrate fauna in the remote and pristine sub-Antarctic Cape Horn Archipelago, Chile. Biodivers Conserv 15:3295–3313CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Anderson CB, Griffith CR, Rosemond AD, Rozzi R, Dollenz O (2006b) The effects of invasive North American beavers on riparian plant communities in Cape Horn, Chile. Do exotic beavers engineer differently in sub-Antarctic ecosystems? Biol Conserv 128:467–474CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Anderson CB, Pastur GM, Lencinas MV, Wallem PK, Moorman MC, Rosemond AD (2009) Do introduced North American beavers Castor canadensis engineer differently in southern South America? An overview with implications for restoration. Mamm Rev 39:33–52CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bartoszewicz M, Zalewski A (2003) American mink, Mustela vison diet and predation on waterfowl in the Słońsk Reserve, western Poland. Folia Zool 52:225–238Google Scholar
  8. Ben-David M, Bowyer RT, Faro JB (1996) Niche separation by mink and river otters: coexistence in a marine environment. Oikos 75:41–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Birks JDS, Dunstone N (1991) Mink. In: Corbet GB, Harris S (eds) The handbook of British mammals. Blackwell Scientific Publications, Oxford, pp 212–218Google Scholar
  10. Bonesi L, Macdonald DW (2004) Evaluation of sign surveys as a way to estimate the relative abundance of American mink (Mustela vison). J Zool 262:65–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Bonesi L, Palazon S (2007) The American mink in Europe: status, impacts, and control. Biol Conserv 134:470–483CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Bonesi L, Dunstone N, O’Connell M (2000) Winter selection of habitats within intertidal foraging areas by mink (Mustela vison). J Zool 250:419–424CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Bonesi L, Harrington LA, Maran T, Sidorovich VE, Macdonald DW (2006) Demography of three populations of American mink Mustela vison in Europe. Mamm Rev 36:98–106CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Choi C (2008) Tierra del Fuego: the beavers must die. Nature 453:968CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Clode D, Haliwell EC, Macdonald DW (1995) A comparison of body condition in riverine and coastal mink (Mustela vsion). J Zool 237:686–689CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Courchamp F, Chapuis JL, Pascal M (2003) Mammal invaders on islands: impact, control and control impact. Biol Rev 78:347–383CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Couve E, Vidal C (2003) Birds of the Beagle Channel and Cape Horn. Ediciones Fantástico Sur, Punta ArenasGoogle Scholar
  18. Craik JCA (1997) Long-term effects of North American Mink Mustela vison on seabirds in western Scotland. Bird Study 44:303–309CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Craik JCA (2008) Sex ratio in catches of American mink—how to catch the females. J Nat Conserv 16:56–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Crawley MJ (2007) The R book. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, ChichesterCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Davison A, Birks JDS, Brookes RC, Braithwaite TC, Messenger JE (2002) On the origin of faeces: morphological versus molecular methods for surveying rare carnivores from their scats. J Zool 257:141–143CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Delibes M, Clavero M, Prenda J, del Carmen Blásquez M, Ferreras P (2004) Potential impact of an exotic mammal on rocky intertidal communities of northwestern Spain. Biol Invasions 6:213–219CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Dunstone N (1993) The mink. T & AD Poyser Ltd, LondonGoogle Scholar
  24. Dunstone N, Birks JDS (1985) The comparative ecology of coastal, riverine and lacustrine mink Mustela vison in Britain. Z Angew Zool 59:59–70Google Scholar
  25. Dunstone N, Ireland M (1989) The mink menace? A reappraisal. In: Putman RJ (ed) Mammals as pests. Chapman & Hall, London, pp 225–241Google Scholar
  26. Elton CS (1958) The ecology of invasions by animals and plants. Methuen and Company, LondonGoogle Scholar
  27. Fasola L, Chehébar C, Macdonald DW, Porro G, Cassini MH (2009) Do alien North American mink compete for resources with native South American river otter in Argentinean Patagonia? J Zool 277:187–195CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Ferreras P, Macdonald DW (1999) The impact of American mink Mustela vison on water birds in the upper Thames. J Appl Ecol 36:701–708CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Fielding AH, Haworth PF (1995) Testing the generality of bird-habitat models. Conserv Biol 9:1466–1481CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Fitzpatrick M, Weltzin JF, Sanders NJ, Dunn RR (2007) The biogeography of prediction error: why does the introduced range of the fire ant over-predict its native range? Glob Ecol Biogeogr 16:24–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Gerell R (1970) Home ranges and movements of the mink (Mustela vison Schreber) in southern Sweden. Oikos 21:160–173CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Gruber B, Reineking B, Calabrese JM, Kranz A, Poledníková K, Polenik L, Klenke R, Valentin A, Henle K (2008) A new method for estimating visitation rates of cryptic animals via repeated surveys of indirect signs. J Appl Ecol 45:728–735CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Halliwell EC, Macdonald DW (1996) American mink Mustela vison in the Upper Thames catchment: relationship with selected prey species and den availability. Biol Conserv 76:51–56CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Harrington LA, Harrington AL, Macdonald DW (2008) Estimating the relative abundance of American mink Mustela vison on lowland rivers: evaluation and comparison of two techniques. Eur J Wildl Res 54:79–87CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Harrington LA, Harrington AL, Moorhouse T, Gelling M, Bonesi L, Macdonald DW (2009) American mink control on inland rivers in southern England: an experimental test of a model strategy. Biol Conserv 142:839–849CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Hatler DF (1976) The coastal mink of Vancouver Island, British Columbia. Dissertation, University of British ColumbiaGoogle Scholar
  37. Hosmer DW, Lemeshow S (2000) Applied logistic regression. John Wiley & Sons, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Hutchinson GE (1957) Concluding remarks. Cold Spring Harb Symp Quant Biol 22:415–427Google Scholar
  39. Ibarra JT, Fasola L, Macdonald DW, Rozzi R, Bonacic C (2009) Invasive American mink Mustela vison in wetlands of the Cape Horn Biosphere Reserve, southern Chile: what are they eating? Oryx 43:1–4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Jaksic FM, Iriartre JA, Jiménez JE, Martínez DR (2002) Invaders without frontiers: cross-border invasions of exotic mammals. Biol Invasions 4:157–173CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Jefferies DJ (2003) The water vole and mink survey of Britain 1996–1998 with a history of the long term changes in the status of both species and their causes. The Vincent Wildlife Trust, LedburyGoogle Scholar
  42. Krajik K (2005) Winning the war against island invaders. Science 310:1410–1413CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Lizarralde MS, Escobar JM (2000) Mamíferos exóticos en la Tierra del Fuego. Ciencia hoy 10:52–63Google Scholar
  44. Macdonald DW, Thom MD (2001) Alien carnivores: unwelcome experiments in ecological theory. In: Gittleman JL, Funk SM, Macdonald DW, Wayne RK (eds) Carnivore conservation. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 93–122Google Scholar
  45. Martínez Pastur G, Lencinas MV, Escobar J, Quiroga P, Malmierca L, Lizarralde M (2006) Understorey succession in areas of Nothofagus forests in Tierra del Fuego (Argentina) affected by Castor canadensis. Appl Veg Sci 9:143–154CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Mason SJ, Graham NE (2002) Areas beneath the relative operating characteristics (ROC) and relative operating levels (ROL) curves: statistical significance and interpretation. Q J R Meteorol Soc 128:2145–2166CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. McDonald RA (2002) Resource partitioning among British and Irish mustelids. J Anim Ecol 71:185–200CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Medina G (1997) A comparison of the diet and distribution of southern river otter (Lutra provocax) and mink (Mustela vison) in Southern Chile. J Zool 242:291–297Google Scholar
  49. Mitchell JL (1961) Mink movements and populations on a Montana river. J Wildl Manage 25:48–54CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Mittermeier RA, Mittermeier CG, Brooks TM, Pilgrim JD, Konstant WR, da Fonseca GAB, Kormos C (2003) Wilderness and biodiversity conservation. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 18:10309–10313CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Moore D (1983) Flora of Tierra del Fuego, Anthony Nelson, England. Missouri Botanical GardenGoogle Scholar
  52. Moore NP, Roy SS, Helyar A (2003) Mink (Mustela vison) eradication to protect ground-nesting birds in the Western Isles, Scotland, United Kingdom. N Z J Zool 30:443–452Google Scholar
  53. Nordström M, Korpimäki E (2004) Effects of island isolation and feral mink removal on bird communities on small islands in the Baltic Sea. J Anim Ecol 73:424–433CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Nordström M, Laine J, Ahola M, Korpimäki E (2004) Reduced nest defence intensity and improved breeding success in terns as responses to removal of non-native American mink. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 55:454–460CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Palomares F, Caro TM (1999) Interspecific killing among mammalian carnivores. Am Nat 153:492–508CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Pearman PB, Guisan A, Broennimann O, Randin CF (2008) Niche dynamics in space and time. Trends Ecol Evol 23:149–158CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  57. Perry HR Jr (1982) Muskrats. In: Chapman JA, Feldhammer GA (eds) Wild mammals of North America: biology, management and economics. John Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, pp 282–325Google Scholar
  58. Pisano E (1977) Fitogeografía de Fuego-Patagonia chilena. I. Comunidades vegetales entre las latitudes 52° y 56°S. Anal Inst Patagonia 8:121–250Google Scholar
  59. Previtali A, Cassini MH, Macdonald DW (1998) Habitat use and diet of the American mink (Mustela vison) in Argentinian Patagonia. J Zool 246:482–486CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Quammen D (1997) The song of the Dodo. Island biogeography in an age of extinction. Scribner, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  61. R Development Core Team (2008) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. ISBN 3-900051-07-0. http://www.R-project.org. Cited 31 March 2009
  62. Raya Rey AR, Schiavini A (2002) Distribution and density of Kelp Geese and Flightless Steamer Ducks along the Beagle Channel, Tierra del Fuego, Argentina. Waterbirds 25:225–229CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Reynolds JC, Short MJ, Leigh RJ (2004) Development of population control strategies for mink Mustela vison, using floating rafts as monitors and trap sites. Biol Conserv 120:533–543CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Rozzi R, Sherriffs M (2003) El visón (Mustela vison Schreber, Carnivora: Mustelidae), un nuevo mamífero exótico para la isla Navarino. Anal Inst Patagonia 31:97–104Google Scholar
  65. Rozzi R, Massardo F, Berghöfer A, Anderson CB, Mansilla A, Mansilla M, Plana J, Berghöfer U, Araya P, Barros E (2006) Cape Horn Biosphere Reserve: nomination document for the incorporation of the Cape Horn Archipelago territory into the Word Biosphere Reserve Network. MaB Program–UNESCO-Ediciones de la Universidad de Magallanes, Punta ArenasGoogle Scholar
  66. Sala OE, Chapin FS III, Armesto JJ, Berlow E, Bloomfield J, Dirzo R, Huber-Sanwald E, Huenneke LF, Jackson RB, Kinzig A, Leemans R, Lodge DM, Mooney HA, Oesterheld M, Poff NL, Sykes MT, Walker BH, Walker M, Wall DH (2000) Global biodiversity scenarios for the year 2100. Science 287:770–1774CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Schüttler E, Cárcamo J, Rozzi R (2008) Diet of the American mink Mustela vison and its potential impact on the native fauna of Navarino Island, Cape Horn Biosphere Reserve, Chile. Rev Chil Hist Nat 81:599–613CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Schüttler E, Klenke R, McGehee S, Rozzi R, Jax K (2009) Vulnerability of ground-nesting waterbirds to predation by invasive American mink in the Cape Horn Biosphere Reserve, Chile. Biol Conserv 142:1450–1460CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Sidorovich NV, Polozov A (2002) Partial eradication of the American mink Mustela vison as a way to maintain the declining population of the European mink Mustela lutreola in a continental area. A case study in the Lovat River head, NE Belarus. Small Carniv Conserv 26:12–14Google Scholar
  70. Sidorovich VE, Jędrzejewska B, Jędrzejewski W (1996) Winter distribution and abundance of mustelids and beavers in the river valleys of Białowieża Primeval Forest. Acta Theriol 41:155–170Google Scholar
  71. Simberloff D (2003) How much information on population biology is needed to manage introduced species? Conserv Biol 17:83–92CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Simberloff D (2006) Invasional meltdown 6 years later: important phenomenon, unfortunate metaphor, or both? Ecol Lett 9:912–919CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  73. Simberloff D, Von Holle B (1999) Positive interactions of nonindigenous species: invasional meltdown? Biol Invasions 1:21–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Simonetti JA (1989) Microhabitat use by small mammals in central Chile. Oikos 56:309–318CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Sleeman DP, Davenport J, More SJ, Clegg TA, Griffin JM, O’Boyle I (2009) The effectiveness of barriers to badger Meles meles immigration in the Irish Four Area project. Eur J Wildl Res (in press). doi 10.1007/s10344-008-0241-4
  76. Smal CM (1991) Population studies on feral American mink Mustela vison in Ireland. J Zool 224:233–249CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Soto N, Cabello J (2007) Informe final: programa control de fauna dañina en la XIIa Región 2004–2007. SAG-FONDEMA. Servicio Agrícola y Ganadero, Magallanes y Antártica Chilena, Punta ArenasGoogle Scholar
  78. Steinberg PD, Kendrick GA (1999) Kelp forests. In: Andrew N (ed) Under southern seas, the ecology of Australia’s rocky reefs. University of New South Wales Press, Sydney, pp 61–71Google Scholar
  79. Strachan R, Jefferies DJ (1993) The water vole Arvicola terrestris in Britain 1989–1990: its distribution and changing status. Vincent Wildlife Trust, LondonGoogle Scholar
  80. Thompson WL, White GC, Gowan C (1998) Monitoring vertebrate populations. Academic Press, San DiegoGoogle Scholar
  81. Travaini A, DonaHzar JA, Ceballos O, Hiraldo F (2001) Food habits of the Crested Caracara (Caracara plancus) in the Andean Patagonia: the role of breeding constraints. J Arid Environ 48:211–219CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Vitousek PM, D’Antonio CM, Loope LL, Rejmánek M, Westbrooks R (1997) Introduced species: a significant component of human-caused global change. N Z J Ecol 21:1–16Google Scholar
  83. Wilson GJ, Delahay RJ (2001) A review of methods to estimate the abundance of terrestrial carnivores using field signs and observation. Wildl Res 28:151–164CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Yamaguchi N, Rushton S, Macdonald DW (2003) Habitat preferences of feral American mink in the Upper Thames. J Mamm 84:1356–1373CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Zalewski A, Piertney SB, Zalewska H, Lambin X (2009) Landscape barriers reduce gene flow in an invasive carnivore: geographical and local genetic structure of American mink in Scotland. Mol Ecol 18:1601–1615CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  86. Żurowski W, Kammler J (1987) American mink (Mustela vison Schreber, 1777) in beaver’s sites. Przeglad Zool 31:513–521Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Elke Schüttler
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
  • José Tomás Ibarra
    • 2
    • 4
  • Bernd Gruber
    • 5
  • Ricardo Rozzi
    • 2
    • 6
  • Kurt Jax
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Conservation BiologyUFZ-Helmholtz Centre for Environmental ResearchLeipzigGermany
  2. 2.Omora Ethnobotanical Park (IEB-Institute of Ecology and Biodiversity Universidad de Magallanes, and Omora Foundation)Puerto Williams, Antarctic ProvinceChile
  3. 3.Lehrstuhl für LandschaftsökologieTechnische Universität München-WeihenstephanFreisingGermany
  4. 4.Fauna Australis Wildlife Laboratory, Natural Resources Program, School of Agriculture and Forestry SciencesPontifica Universidad Católica de ChileSantiagoChile
  5. 5.Department of Computational Landscape EcologyUFZ-Helmholtz Centre for Environmental ResearchLeipzigGermany
  6. 6.Department of PhilosophyUniversity of North TexasDentonUSA

Personalised recommendations