|
|
Tallian, A., Mattisson, J., Samelius, G., Odden, J., Mishra, C., Linnell, J. D. C., Lkhagvajav, P., Johansson, O. (2023). Wild versus domestic prey: Variation in the kill-site behavior of two large felids. Global Ecology and Conservation, 47(e026750), 1–13.
Abstract: Livestock depredation is an important source of conflict for many terrestrial large carnivore
species. Understanding the foraging behavior of large carnivores on domestic prey is therefore
important for both mitigating conflict and conserving threatened carnivore populations. Handling
time is an important, albeit often overlooked, component of predatory behavior, as it directly
influences access to food biomass, which can affect predator foraging efficiency and subsequent
kill rates. We used long-term data on snow leopards (Panthera uncia) in Mongolia (Asia) and
Eurasian lynx (Lynx lynx) in Norway (Europe) to examine how large carnivore foraging patterns
varied between domestic and wild prey, and how the different landscape characteristics affected
those patterns. Our results suggest handling time was generally shorter for domestic compared to
wild prey. For snow leopards, rugged terrain was linked to increased handling time for larger
prey. For lynx, handling time increased with terrain ruggedness for domestic, but not wild, prey,
and was greater in closed compared to open habitats. There were also other differences in snow
leopard and lynx foraging behavior, e.g., snow leopards also stayed longer at, and remained closer
to, their kill sites than lynx. Shorter handling time suggests that felids may have utilized domestic
prey less effectively than wild prey, i.e., they spent less time consuming their prey. This could a)
result in an energetic or fitness cost related to decreased felid foraging efficiency caused by the
risk of anthropogenic disturbance, or b) exacerbate conflict if reduced handling time associated
with easy prey results in increased livestock depredation.
|
|
|
|
Linnell, J., Swenson, J., Landa A., & and Kvam, T. (1998). Methods for monitoring European large carnivores – A worldwide review of relevant experience. NINA Oppdragsmelding, 549, 1–38.
Abstract: Against a background of recovering large carnivore populations in Norway, and many other areas of Europe, it is becoming increasingly important to develop methods to monitor their populations. A variety of parameters can monitored depending on objectives. These parameters include: presence/absense, distribution, population trend indices, minimum counts, statistical estimates of population size, reproductive parameters and health/condition. Three broad categories of monitoring techniques can be recognised each with increasing levels of fieldwork required. The first category includes those techniques that do not require original fieldwork. The second category involves fieldwork, but where individually recognisable carnivores are not available. The third category includes methods where fieldwork has recognisable individuals available. Different mehtods tend to have been used for different species, mainly because of limitations imposed by the different species' ecology. The most precise estimates of population size have been obtained in research projects with relatively small study sites and with the help of radio-telemetry. However, it may be difficult, or impossible, to apply these methods over large monitoring areas. Therefore, in terms of practical management, a combination of minimum counts, supported by an independent index may be more useful than statistical population estimates. All methods should be subject to a careful design process, and power analysis should be conducted to determine the sensitivity of the method to detect changes.
Based on the review of over 200 papers and reports we recommend a package of complementary monitoring methods for brown bear, wolverine, lynx and wolf in Norway. These include the use of observations from the public and reports of predation on livestock to determine broad patterns of distribution, and an index based on hunter observations per hunting day, for all four species. Minimum counts of reproductive units, natal dens, family groups, and packs, should be obtained from snow-tracking for wolverines, lynx and wolves respectively. In addition a track-count index should be obtained for wolverines and lynx. As much data as possible should be obtained of lynx and wolvereines killed in the annual harvest. Brown bears will be difficult to monitor without the use of radio-telemetry, therfore they may require periodic telemetry based, mark-recapture studies. Such a program can easily be constructed within existing central and regional wildlife management structures, but will require extensive involvement from hunters.
|
|
