Abstract
Feral pigs damage the significant ecological and cultural values of tropical Australian wetlands. Control measures such as culling, baiting, and trapping can reduce overall pig populations, but do not eliminate the substantial physical damage to wetlands that can occur from just a few individuals. Exclusion fences have been adopted as a potential technique to prevent damage to selected wetlands. To test the effectiveness of exclusion fences we measured the physical damage caused by pigs to multiple wetlands in the Archer River catchment of tropical northern Australia. Wetlands were fenced using a typical cattle exclusion fence, a specific pig exclusion fence or had no fence. Initial analyses of these fence treatments showed no significant difference in the intensity of physical pig damage to exposed wetland sediments and fringing vegetation. However, several of the pig exclusion fences were found to have been compromised. Reanalysis indicated wetlands with functioning pig exclusion fences had no physical pig damage and this was significantly less damage than in all other treatments. In contrast, wetlands with compromised pig exclusion fences had damage that was statistically equivalent to sites without fences or with cattle exclusion fences, but in individual cases had the worst damage recorded in any of the treatments. Compromised pig exclusion fencing of wetlands can thus be worse than having no fencing at all. This suggests that the successful prevention of pig damage to wetlands by exclusion fences requires ongoing and effective fence monitoring and maintenance regimes.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
References
Barrios-Garcia MN, Ballari SA (2012) Impact of wild boar (Sus scrofa) in its introduced and native range: a review. Biol Invasions 14:2283–2300. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10530-012-0229-6
Bowman DMJS, Panton WJ (1991) Sign and habitat impact of banteng (Bos javanicus) and pig (Sus scrofa), Cobourg Peninsula, northern Australia. Aust J Ecol 16:15–17. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1442-9993.1991.tb01477.x
Caley P (1997) Movements, activity patterns and habitat use of feral pigs (Sus scrofa) in a tropical habitat. Wildl Res 24:77–87. https://doi.org/10.1071/WR94075
Choquenot D, Hone J, Saunders G (1999) Using aspects of predator-prey theory to evaluate helicopter shooting for feral pig control. Wildl Res 26:251–261
Connolly TA, Day TD, King CM (2009) Estimating the potential for reinvasion by mammalian pests through pest-exclusion fencing. Wildl Res 36:410–421
Cowled BD, Lapidge SJ, Smith M, Staples L (2006) Attractiveness of a novel omnivore bait, PIGOUT®, to feral pigs (Sus scrofa) and assessment of risks of bait uptake by non-target species. Wildl Res 33:651–660. https://doi.org/10.1071/WR06054
Doupé RG, Schaffer J, Knott MJ, Dicky PW (2009) A description of freshwater turtle habitat destruction by feral pigs in tropical north-eastern Australia. Herpetol Conserv Biol 4:331–339
Froese JG, Smith CS, Durr PA et al (2017) Modelling seasonal habitat suitability for wide-ranging species: invasive wild pigs in northern Australia. PLoS ONE 12:1–22. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0177018
Hone J (1995) Spatial and temporal aspects of vertebrate pest damage with emphasis on feral pigs. J Appl Ecol 32:311–319. https://doi.org/10.2307/2405098
Kotanen PM (1995) Responses of vegetation to a changing regime of disturbance: effects of feral pigs in a Californian coastal prairie. Ecography (Cop) 18:190–199
McClure ML, Burdett CL, Farnsworth ML et al (2018) A globally-distributed alien invasive species poses risks to United States imperiled species. Sci Rep 8:1–9. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-23657-z
Mitchell J, Mayer R (1997) Diggings by feral pigs within the wet tropics World Heritage Area of north Queensland. Wildl Res 24:591–601. https://doi.org/10.1071/WR96041
Ross B, Perry JJ, Waltham N et al (2017) Managing feral pigs for biodiversity conservation in Cape York: a ranger’s handbook. Cairns, Australia
R Core Team (2017) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. https://www.R-project.org/
West BC, Cooper AL, Armstrong JB (2009) Managing wild pigs: a technical guide. Hum Wildl Interact Monogr 1:1–55. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-024821-9.50009-3
Whytlaw PA, Edwards W, Congdon BC (2013) Marine turtle nest depredation by feral pigs (Sus scrofa) on the Western Cape York Peninsula Australia: implications for management. Wildl Res 40:377–384. https://doi.org/10.1071/WR12198
Acknowledgements
This project builds on a long-term feral animal management and monitoring program developed by Kalan Enterprises and Aak Puul Ngangtam and their partners. Kalan and Aak Puul Ngangtam have developed their feral animal management research and management agenda to meet the objectives of traditional owners in the region and have invited science organisations to contribute to the outcomes. This project is jointly funded through the Queensland Government and the Australian Government’s National Environmental Science Program (NESP). We would also like to acknowledge John Bowlen and Kate Hodges for help with fieldwork and Justin Perry for helpful comments on the manuscript.
Funding
This project is jointly funded through the Queensland Government and the Australian Government’s National Environmental Science Program (NESP).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Negus, P.M., Marshall, J.C., Clifford, S.E. et al. No sitting on the fence: protecting wetlands from feral pig damage by exclusion fences requires effective fence maintenance. Wetlands Ecol Manage 27, 581–585 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11273-019-09670-7
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11273-019-09670-7