Advertisement

Biodiversity & Conservation

, Volume 15, Issue 13, pp 4309–4334 | Cite as

Fox-hunting in England and Wales: its contribution to the management of woodland and other habitats

  • J. A. EwaldEmail author
  • S. E. Callegari
  • N. G. Kingdon
  • N. A. Graham
Article

Abstract

Hunting foxes with hounds has been a countryside pursuit in Britain since the 17th Century, but its effect nationally on habitat management is little understood by the general public. A survey questionnaire was distributed to 163 mounted fox hunts of England and Wales to quantify their management practices in woodland and other habitat. Ninety-two hunts (56%), covering 75,514 km2, returned details on woodland management motivated by the improvement of their sport. The management details were verified via on-site visits for a sample of 200 woodlands. Following verification, the area of woodlands containing the management was conservatively estimated at 24,053 (±2241) ha, comprising 5.9% of woodland area within the whole of the area hunted by the 92 hunts. Management techniques included: tree planting, coppicing, felling, ride and perimeter management. A case study in five hunt countries in southern England examined, through the use of botanical survey and butterfly counts, the consequences of the hunt management on woodland ground flora and butterflies. Managed areas had, within the last 5 years, been coppiced and rides had been cleared. Vegetation cover in managed and unmanaged sites averaged 86% and 64%, respectively, and managed areas held on average 4 more plant species and a higher plant diversity than unmanaged areas (Shannon index of diversity: 2.25 vs. 1.95). Both the average number of butterfly species (2.2 vs. 0.3) and individuals counted (4.6 vs. 0.3) were higher in the managed than unmanaged sites.

Key words

Butterflies Conservation Fox hunts Ground flora Management Woodland 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Aebischer N.J., Robertson P.A. and Kenward R.E. (1993a). Compositional analysis of habitat use from animal radio-tracking data. Ecology 74: 1313–1325CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Aebischer N.J., Marcstrom V., Kenward R.E. and Karlbom M. (1993b). Survival and habitat utilisation: a case for compositional analysis. In: Lebreton, J.-D. and North, P.M. (eds) Marked Individuals in the Study of Bird Population, pp 343–353. Birkhauser Verlag, SwitzerlandGoogle Scholar
  3. Anon. 1994. Biodiversity: The UK Action Plan. HMSO, London.Google Scholar
  4. Anon. 1995. Biodiversity: The UK Steering Group ReportVol. 1: Meeting the Rio Challenge. HMSO, London.Google Scholar
  5. Asher J., Warren M., Fox R., Harding P., Jeffcoate G. and Jeffcoate S. (2001). The Millenium Atlas of Butterflies in Britain and Ireland. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  6. Bergman K.O. (2001). Population dynamics and the importance of habitat management for conservation of the butterfly Lopinga achine. J. Appl. Ecol. 38: 1303–1313CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bunce R.G.H., Smart S.M., Watkins J.W. and Scott W.A. (1999). Measuring Change in British Vegetation. Ecofact, Vol. 2. Institute of Terrestrial Ecology, Merlewood Research Station, CumbriaGoogle Scholar
  8. Butterfield J. (1997). Carabid community succession during the forestry cycle in conifer plantations. Ecography 20(6): 614–625CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cobham Resource Consultants 1997. Countryside Sports. Their Economic, Social and Conservation Significance. The Standing Conference on Countryside Sports, The College of Estate Management, Whiteknights, Reading.Google Scholar
  10. Department for EnvironmentFood and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) 2003. Farm Woodland Premium Scheme: Rules and Procedures.Google Scholar
  11. Department of the EnvironmentTransport and the Regions & Natural Environment Research Council (DETR) 1999. MAVIS Plot Analyser, version 1.0.Google Scholar
  12. Emmet A.M. and Heath J. (1990). The Moths and Butterflies of Great Britain and Ireland, 7, part 1, Hesperiidae–Nymphalidaethe Butterflies. Harley Books, ColchesterGoogle Scholar
  13. Ford E.D. and Newbould P.J. (1977). The biomass and production of ground vegetation and its relation to tree cover through a deciduous woodland cycle. J. Ecol. 65: 201–212CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Forestry Commission. (1998). UK Forestry Standard: The Government Approach to Sustainable Forestry. Forestry Commission, EdinburghGoogle Scholar
  15. Forestry Commission 2002. A Guide to Managing Deadwood in Forestry Commission Forests – Life in the Deadwood. Forest Enterprise Environment and Communications, Edinburgh.Google Scholar
  16. Fuller R.J. and Peterken G.F. (1995). Woodland and Scrub. In: Sutherland, W.J. and Hill, D.A. (eds) Managing Habitats for Conservation, pp 327–361. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  17. Fuller R.J. and Warren M.S. (1991). Coppiced Woodlands: Their Management for Wildlife. Nature Conservancy Council, PeterboroughGoogle Scholar
  18. Fuller R.J. and Warren M.S. (1995). Management for biodiversity in British Woodlands – striking a balance. British Wildlife 7: 26–37Google Scholar
  19. Fuller R.M., Smith G.M., Sanderson J.M., Hill R.A., Thomson A.G., Cox R., Brown N.J., Clarke R.T., Rothery P. and Gerard F.F. 2002. Land Cover Map 2000. Countryside Survey 2000 Module 7 Final Report. Centre for Ecology and Hydrology, Huntingdon, UK.Google Scholar
  20. Greatorex-Davies J.N., Hall M.L. and Marrs R.H. (1992). The conservation of the pearl-bordered fritillary (Boloria euphrosyne L.): preliminary studies on the creation and management of glades in conifer plantations. Forest Ecol. Manag. 53: 1–14CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Greatorex-Davies J.N., Sparks T.H. and Hall M.L. (1994). The response of heteroptera and coleoptera species to shade and aspect in rides of coniferised lowland woods in southern England. Biol. Conserv. 67(3): 255–273CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Grime J.P., Hodgson J.G. and Hunt R. (1988). Comparative Plant Ecology: A Functional Approach to Common British Species. Unwin Hyman, LondonGoogle Scholar
  23. Haines-Young R.H., Barr C.J., Black H.I.J., Briggs D.J., Bunce R.G.H., Clarke R.T., Cooper A., Dawson F.H., Firbank L.G., Fuller R.M., Furse M.T., Gillespie M.K., Hill R., Hornung M., Howard D.C., McCann T., Morecroft M.D., Petit S., Sier A.R.J., Smart S.M., Smith G.M., Stott A.P., Stuart R.C. and Watkins J.W. (2000). Accounting for Nature: Assessing Habitats in the UK Countryside. DETR, LondonGoogle Scholar
  24. Harris E. and Harris J. (1991). Wildlife Conservation in Managed Woodland and Forests. Basil Blackwell, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  25. Heydon M.J. and Reynolds J.C. (2000). Fox (Vulpes vulpes) management in three contrasting regions of Britain, in relation to agricultural and sporting interests. J. Zool. 251: 237–252CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Hobson D. 2000. Hunting with Dogs: Conservation and Environment. Submission to the Committee of Inquiry into Hunting with Dogs in England and Wales.Google Scholar
  27. Hodge S.J. and Peterken G.F. (1998). Deadwood in British forests: priorities and a strategy. Forestry 71: 99–112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Howard N.S. and Carroll J.P. (2001). Driven game shooting on farms in Essex; UK implications of land management and conservation. Game Wildlife Sci. 18(2): 157–169Google Scholar
  29. Kirby K.J. (1988). Changes in the ground flora under plantations on ancient woodland sites. Forestry 61(4): 317–338Google Scholar
  30. Kirby K.J. (1990). Changes in the ground flora of a broadleaved wood within a clear fell, group fells and a coppiced block. Forestry 63(3): 241–249Google Scholar
  31. Kirby K.J., Reid D.M., Thomas R.C. and Goldsmith F.B. (1998). Preliminary estimates of fallen dead wood and standing dead trees in managed and unmanaged forests in Britain. J. Appl. Ecol. 35: 148–155CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Krebs C.J. (1989). Ecological Methodology. Harper & Row, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  33. Lawesson J.E., Grashof C., Firbank L., Honnay O., Hermy M., Hobitz P. and Jensen L.M. (1998). Species diversity and area-relationships in Danish beech forests. Forest Ecol. Manag. 106: 235–245CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Lucherini M., Lovari S. and Crema G. (1995). Habitat use and ranging behaviour of the red fox (Vulpes vulpes) in a Mediterranean rural area: is shelter availability a key factor?. J. Zool. 237: 557–591Google Scholar
  35. Ludolf I.C., Robertson P.A. and Woodburn M.I.A. (1989). Changes in the ground flora and butterfly populations of woodlands managed to encourage pheasants. In: Buckley, GP (eds) Biological Habitat Reconstruction, pp 312–327. Belhaven Press, LondonGoogle Scholar
  36. MacDonald D.W. and Johnson P.J. (2000). Farmers and the custody of the countryside: trends in loss and conservation of non-productive habitats 1981–1998. Biol. Conserv. 94: 221–234CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. McKay H.V. (1991). Egg-laying requirements of woodland butterflies – brimstones (Gonepteryx rhamni) and alder buckthorn (Frangula alnus). J. Appl. Ecol. 28(2): 731–743CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Moore M.R. and Vankat J.L. (1986). Responses of the herb layer to the gap dynamics of a mature beech-maple forest. Am. Midl. Nat. 115: 336–347CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Mountford E.P. and Peterken G.F. (2003). Long-term change and implications for the management of wood-pastures: experience over 40 years from Denny wood, New Forest. Forestry 76: 19–43CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Oldfield T.E.E., Smith R.J., Harrop S.R. and Leader-Williams N. (2003). Field sports and conservation in the United Kingdom. Nature 423: 531–533PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Peterken G.F. (1999). Applying natural forestry concepts in an intensively managed landscape. Global Ecol. Biogeogr. 8: 321–328CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Peterken G.F. and Game M. (1984). Historical factors affecting the number and distribution of vascular plant species in the woodlands of central Lincolnshire. J. Ecol. 72(1): 155–182CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Pollard E. (1977). A method for assessing changes in the abundance of butterflies. Biol. Conserv. 12: 115–134CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Pollard E. and Yates T.J. (1993). Monitoring Butterflies for Ecology and Conservation: The British Butterfly Monitoring Scheme. Chapman & Hall, LondonGoogle Scholar
  45. Preston C.D., Pearman D.A. and Dines T.D. (2002). New Atlas of the British and Irish Flora: An Atlas of the Vascular Plants of Britain, Irelandthe Isle of Man and the Channel Islands. University Press, Oxford, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  46. Rackham O. (1980). Ancient Woodland. Arnold, LondonGoogle Scholar
  47. Rackham O. (1986). The History of the Countryside. J. M. Dent and Sons Ltd., LondonGoogle Scholar
  48. Reynolds J.C. (2000). Fox Control in the Countryside. The Game Conservancy Trust, Fordingbridge, UKGoogle Scholar
  49. Ritter D. (1999). MapInfo for Windows, Version 5.5. MapInfo Corporation, Troy, NYGoogle Scholar
  50. Robertson P.A., Woodburn M.I.A. and Hill D.A. (1988). The effects of woodland management for pheasants on the abundance of butterflies in Dorset, England. Biol. Conserv. 45: 159–167CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Rodwell J.S. (1991). NVC British Plant Communities Volume 1: Woodland and Scrub. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  52. Rollinson T. (2003). The outlook for forestry in the United Kingdom. J. Roy. Agr. Soc. Engl. 164: 1–8Google Scholar
  53. Saunders G., White P.C.L. and Harris S. (1997). Habitat utilisation by urban foxes (Vulpes vulpes) and the implications for rabies control. Mammalia 61: 497–510Google Scholar
  54. Short C. (1994). Implications of Game Management for Woodland Management, Landscape Conservation and Public Recreation. Centre for Rural Studies, Royal Agricultural College, CirencesterGoogle Scholar
  55. Sparks T.H., Porter K., Greatorex-Davies J.N., Hall M.L. and Marrs R.H. (1994). The choice of oviposition sites in woodland by the Duke of Burgundy butterfly Hamaeris lucina in England. Biol. Conserv. 70: 257–264CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Spencer J.W. and Kirby K.J. (1992). An inventory of ancient woodland for England and Wales. Biol. Conserv. 62: 77–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Stace C. (1991). New Flora of the British Isles. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  58. Tapper S. (1999). A Question of Balance. The Game Conservancy Trust, Fordingbridge, UKGoogle Scholar
  59. ter Braak C.J.F. and Smilauer P. (2002). Canoco for Windows Version 4.5. Plant Research International, Wageningen, The NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
  60. Warren M.S. (1993). A review of butterfly conservation in central southern Britain. 1. Protection, evaluation and extinction on prime sites. Biol. Conserv. 64: 25–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Warren M.S. (1995). Managing local microclimates for the high brown fritillary, Argynnis adippe. In: Pullin, A.S. (eds) Ecology and Conservation of Butterflies, pp 198–210. Chapman & Hall, London, UKGoogle Scholar
  62. Wilkinson L. (1998). Systat 9.0 for Windows. SPSS Inc., ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  63. Wohlgemuth T., Bürgi M., Scheidegger C. and Schütz M. (2002). Dominance reduction of species through disturbance – a proposed management principle for central European forests. Forest Ecol. Manag. 166: 1–15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Woodland Trust 2002. Space for Nature: Landscape-scale Action for Woodland Biodiversity.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • J. A. Ewald
    • 1
    Email author
  • S. E. Callegari
    • 2
  • N. G. Kingdon
    • 1
  • N. A. Graham
    • 1
  1. 1.The Game Conservancy TrustFordingbridgeUK
  2. 2.Centre for Wildlife Assessment and Conservation, School of Animal & Microbial SciencesUniversity of ReadingReadingUK

Personalised recommendations