Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorWiggins, Natasha L.en_US
dc.contributor.authorWilliamson, Grant J.en_US
dc.contributor.authorMcCallum, Hamishen_US
dc.contributor.authorMcMahon, Clive R.en_US
dc.contributor.authorBowman, David M. J. S.en_US
dc.date.accessioned2017-05-03T11:48:29Z
dc.date.available2017-05-03T11:48:29Z
dc.date.issued2010en_US
dc.date.modified2011-03-22T07:07:03Z
dc.identifier.issn10353712en_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1071/WR09144en_AU
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10072/37546
dc.description.abstractContext. Understanding how the individual movement patterns and dispersion of a population change following wildlife management interventions is crucial for effective population management. Aims. We quantified the impacts of two wildlife management strategies, a lethal intervention and a subsequent barrier intervention, on localised populations of the two most common macropod species in Tasmania, the Tasmanian pademelon (Thylogale billardierii) and the red-necked wallaby (Macropus rufogriseus rufogriseus). This manipulation allowed us to examine two competing hypotheses concerning the distribution of individuals in animal populations - the Ideal Free Distribution (IFD) hypothesis and the Rose Petal (RP) hypothesis. We predicted that the RP would be supported if individuals maintained their previous home ranges following intervention, whereas the IFD would be supported if individuals redistributed following the management interventions. Methods. The movement patterns of T. billardierii and M. r. rufogriseus were tracked using GPS technology before and after the two management interventions. Key results. Following lethal intervention, pademelons and wallabies (1) maintained their home-range area, (2) increased their utilisation of agricultural habitat and (3) shifted their mean centroid locations compared with the pre-intervention period. Following barrier intervention, pademelons and wallabies (1) maintained their home-range area, (2) decreased their utilisation of agricultural habitat and (3) shifted their mean centroid locations compared with the pre-intervention period. Conclusions. On the basis of the individual responses of macropods to the management strategies (1) lethal intervention appeared to induce small shifts in home-range distributions of those remaining individuals in the population with home ranges overlapping the areas of lethal intervention and (2) barrier intervention is likely to induce whole-scale population movements of the animals that survive the lethal intervention in their search of an alternative food source. Both species displayed spatial and temporal shifts in their home-range distributions in response to lethal and barrier interventions that appear to conform broadly to predictions of IFD, at least in the timeframe of the present experiment. Implications. Wildlife management strategies, which are increasingly constrained by ethical, socio-political and financial considerations, should be based on ecological and behavioural data regarding the likely responses of the target population.en_US
dc.description.peerreviewedYesen_US
dc.description.publicationstatusYesen_AU
dc.languageEnglishen_US
dc.language.isoen_AU
dc.publisherCSIRO Publishingen_US
dc.publisher.placeAustraliaen_US
dc.relation.ispartofstudentpublicationNen_AU
dc.relation.ispartofpagefrom379en_US
dc.relation.ispartofpageto391en_US
dc.relation.ispartofissue5en_US
dc.relation.ispartofjournalWildlife Researchen_US
dc.relation.ispartofvolume37en_US
dc.rights.retentionYen_AU
dc.subject.fieldofresearchZoology not elsewhere classifieden_US
dc.subject.fieldofresearchcode060899en_US
dc.titleShifts in macropod home ranges in response to wildlife management interventionsen_US
dc.typeJournal articleen_US
dc.type.descriptionC1 - Peer Reviewed (HERDC)en_US
dc.type.codeC - Journal Articlesen_US
gro.date.issued2010
gro.hasfulltextNo Full Text


Files in this item

FilesSizeFormatView

There are no files associated with this item.

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

  • Journal articles
    Contains articles published by Griffith authors in scholarly journals.

Show simple item record