Ozsanlav-Harris Luke, McIntosh Aimée L S, Griffin Larry R, Hilton Geoff M, Cao Lei, Shaw Jessica M, Bearhop Stuart
Centre for Ecology and Conservation, University of Exeter, Penryn, Cornwall, UK.
Wildfowl & Wetlands Trust, Slimbridge, Gloucester, UK.
Ecol Appl. 2024 Dec;34(8):e3032. doi: 10.1002/eap.3032. Epub 2024 Oct 25.
Human-wildlife conflict is a global conservation issue, necessitating effective mitigation strategies. Hunting is a common management approach to reduce conflict, but the indirect consequences are often overlooked. Chronic hunting-related disturbance can reduce fitness and redistribute species. In recent decades, goose-agricultural conflict has intensified due to increasing abundance and shifts towards agricultural foraging. On Islay, Scotland, escalating conflict culminated in shooting Greenland barnacle geese Branta leucopsis to reduce damage to agricultural grassland. In this study, we contrast the impact of shooting disturbance on the movement, behavior, energy expenditure and habitat selection of the target species (Greenland barnacle goose) and a vulnerable nontarget species (Greenland white-fronted goose, Anser albifrons flavirostris) using biologging devices (target species: n = 33; nontarget species: n = 94). Both species were displaced by shooting, and greater distances were subsequently traveled by the target species (1.71 km when directly targeted). When disturbed at any distance, total daily movement increased significantly by 1.18 km for the target species but not for the nontarget species. The target species exhibited no accompanying change in diurnal energy expenditure (measured via accelerometery) but foraged in improved grasslands further from roads after shooting disturbance, where disturbance from all sources was likely lower. The significant increases in movement and changes in foraging site selection of the target species could reduce fitness but given the infrequency of shooting disturbances (0.09 per day) there is likely capacity for compensatory feeding to recoup energetic losses. The nontarget species expectedly showed no significant change in energy expenditure, behavior or habitat selection following shooting disturbance, suggesting mitigation strategies have been effective at minimizing fitness impacts. Refuge areas with a 3.5 km diameter (three times the maximum distance from shooting that displacement was detectable) could provide undisturbed foraging for the target species, minimizing compensatory feeding and further agricultural damage. Wildlife managers should, where possible, consider the fitness implications of shooting disturbance, and whether compensatory feeding and redistribution could hamper conflict mitigation. Management strategies should also include species-specific monitoring and mitigation as we have demonstrated differing responses potentially due to imposed mitigation but also differing species ecology and "landscapes of fear."
人类与野生动物的冲突是一个全球性的保护问题，需要有效的缓解策略。狩猎是减少冲突的一种常见管理方法，但间接后果往往被忽视。长期与狩猎相关的干扰会降低动物的适应性并导致物种重新分布。近几十年来，由于鹅的数量增加以及它们转向农业觅食，鹅与农业的冲突加剧。在苏格兰的艾莱岛，不断升级的冲突最终导致射杀格陵兰黑雁（Branta leucopsis）以减少对农业草地的破坏。在本研究中，我们使用生物记录设备对比了射杀干扰对目标物种（格陵兰黑雁）和易受影响的非目标物种（格陵兰白额雁，Anser albifrons flavirostris）的移动、行为、能量消耗和栖息地选择的影响（目标物种：n = 33；非目标物种：n = 94）。两种物种都因射杀而被驱离，随后目标物种移动的距离更远（直接针对目标时为1.71千米）。当在任何距离受到干扰时，目标物种的每日总移动显著增加了1.18千米，而非目标物种则没有。目标物种的每日能量消耗（通过加速度计测量）没有伴随变化，但在射杀干扰后，它们在离道路更远、所有来源干扰可能更低的改良草地上觅食。目标物种移动的显著增加和觅食地点选择的变化可能会降低其适应性，但鉴于射杀干扰的频率较低（每天0.09次），可能有进行补偿性觅食以弥补能量损失的能力。不出所料，非目标物种在射杀干扰后能量消耗、行为或栖息地选择没有显著变化，这表明缓解策略在将对适应性的影响降至最低方面是有效的。直径为3.5千米的避难区域（射杀导致驱离的最大可检测距离的三倍）可以为目标物种提供不受干扰的觅食环境，最大限度地减少补偿性觅食和进一步的农业破坏。野生动物管理者应尽可能考虑射杀干扰对适应性的影响，以及补偿性觅食和重新分布是否会妨碍冲突的缓解。管理策略还应包括针对特定物种的监测和缓解措施，因为正如我们所展示的，由于实施的缓解措施以及不同的物种生态和“恐惧景观”，可能会有不同的反应。
