University of Southern Queensland, Institute for Life Sciences and the Environment, Toowoomba, Queensland, 4350, Australia.
University of Southern Queensland, School of Sciences, Toowoomba, Queensland, 4350, Australia.
Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc. 2020 Dec;95(6):1590-1606. doi: 10.1111/brv.12631. Epub 2020 Jul 28.
Exclusion fencing is a common tool used to mitigate a variety of unwanted economic losses caused by problematic wildlife. While the potential for agricultural, ecological and economic benefits of pest animal exclusion are often apparent, what is less clear are the costs and benefits to sympatric non-target wildlife. This review examines the use of exclusion fencing in a variety of situations around the world to elucidate the potential outcomes of such fencing for wildlife and apply this knowledge to the recent uptake of exclusion fencing on livestock properties in the Australian rangelands. In Australia, exclusion fences are used to eliminate dingo (Canis familiaris dingo) predation on livestock, prevent crop-raiding by emus (Dromaius novaehollandiae), and enable greater control over total grazing pressure through the reduction of macropods (Macropodidae) and feral goats (Capra hircus). A total of 208 journal articles were examined for location, a broad grouping of fence type, and the reported effects the fence was having on the study species. We found 51% of the literature solely discusses intended fencing effects, 42% discusses unintended effects, and only 7% considers both. Africa has the highest proportion of unintended effects literature (52.0%) and Australia has the largest proportion of literature on intended effects (34.2%). We highlight the potential for exclusion fencing to have positive effects on some species and negative effects on others (such as predator exclusion fencing posing a barrier to migration of other species), which remain largely unaddressed in current exclusion fencing systems. From this review we were able to identify where and how mitigation strategies have been successfully used in the past. Harnessing the potential benefits of exclusion fencing while avoiding the otherwise likely costs to both target and non-target species will require more careful consideration than this issue has previously been afforded.
隔离围栏是一种常用的工具，用于减轻由有问题的野生动物造成的各种不必要的经济损失。虽然有害动物排除的农业、生态和经济效益通常是明显的，但对于同域非目标野生动物的成本和效益则不太清楚。本综述审查了世界各地各种情况下使用隔离围栏的情况，以阐明这种围栏对野生动物的潜在结果，并将这些知识应用于澳大利亚旱地牧场最近在牲畜场采用隔离围栏的情况。在澳大利亚，隔离围栏用于消除野狗（Canis familiaris dingo）对牲畜的捕食，防止鸸鹋（Dromaius novaehollandiae）对农作物的侵害，并通过减少有袋类动物（Macropodidae）和野生山羊（Capra hircus）来更好地控制总放牧压力。共检查了 208 篇期刊文章，以了解围栏的位置、围栏类型的广泛分组以及围栏对研究物种的报告影响。我们发现，51%的文献仅讨论了预期的围栏效果，42%讨论了意外效果，只有 7%同时考虑了这两种效果。非洲的意外效果文献比例最高（52.0%），而澳大利亚的预期效果文献比例最大（34.2%）。我们强调了隔离围栏对某些物种可能产生积极影响，而对其他物种可能产生负面影响的潜力（例如，排除捕食者的围栏对其他物种的迁移构成障碍），而这些影响在当前的隔离围栏系统中基本上没有得到解决。从本综述中，我们能够确定过去在哪里以及如何成功地使用缓解策略。利用隔离围栏的潜在好处，同时避免对目标和非目标物种可能产生的不利影响，需要比以前更仔细地考虑。
