Skip to main content

Search the SPREP Catalogue

3 result(s) found.

Sort by

You searched for

  • Author Silander, S.
    X
  • Collection Biodiversity Conservation
    X
  • Subject Invasive species
    X
Rhesus macaque eradication to restore the ecological integrity of Desecheo National Wildlife Refuge, Puerto Rico.
Biodiversity Conservation
Available Online

Campbell, K.J.

,

DeNicola, A.J.

,

Hall, T.J.

,

Hanson, C.C.

,

Keitt, B.S.

,

Silander, S.

2019
A non-native introduced population of rhesus macaques (Macaca mulatta) was targeted for removal from Desecheo Island (117 ha), Puerto Rico. Macaques were introduced in 1966 and contributed to several plant and animal extirpations. Since their release, three eradication campaigns were unsuccessful at removing the population; a fourth campaign that addressed potential causes for previous failures was declared successful in 2017. Key attributes that led to the success of this campaign included a robust partnership, adequate funding, and skilled ?eld sta? with a strong eradication ethic that followed a plan based on eradication theory. Furthermore, the incorporation of modern technology including strategic use of remote camera traps, monitoring of radio-collared Judas animals, night hunting with night vision and thermal ri?e scopes, and the use of high-power semi-automatic ? rearms made eradication feasible due to an increase in the probability of detection and likelihood of removal. Precision shooting and trapping were the primary methods used throughout the campaign. Long-term monitoring using camera traps and observed sign guided a management strategy that adapted over time in response to population density and structure. Lessons learnt include, 1) macaques quickly adjusted their behaviour in response to human presence and removal methods, 2) camera traps and thermal scopes provided high detection likelihood compared to other methods, and 3) the use of Judas animals and night hunting with thermal and night vision ri?e-scopes facilitated removals. The removal of macaques from Desecheo Island appears to be the ?rst introduced non-hominid primate eradication from an island.
Trail cameras are a key monitoring tool for determining target and non-target bait-take during rodent removal operations: evidence from Desecheo Island rat eradication
Biodiversity Conservation
Available Online

Figuerola-Hernandez, C.

,

Samra, C.

,

Shiels, A.B.

,

Silander, S.

,

Swinnerton, K.J.

,

Will, D.

,

Witmer, G.W.

2019
Efforts to remove invasive rodents (e.g. Rattus spp. and Mus musculus) from islands often use toxicant-laced baits containing the anticoagulants brodifacoum or diphacinone. Rodenticide baits are generally delivered through aerial- or hand-broadcast, or in bait stations. These baits are not rodent-species and are subject to non-target consumption or secondary exposure (e.g. an individual preying upon another individual that has consumed bait). During rodenticide applications, it is generally unknown which animals are visiting and consuming bait; and to quantify this, we recommend using trail cameras (e.g. Reconyx™ motion-activated infra-red) positioned to monitor individual bait pellets. To demonstrate the importance and effectiveness of using trail cameras during such operations, we report results of target (Rattus rattus, black rat) and non-target (native land crab, lizard, insect) bait-interactions after an aerial-broadcast of Brodifacoum-25D Conservation to eradicate rats from Desecheo Island, Puerto Rico. During the ?rst ?ve days following bait application, trail cameras (n = 15) revealed that there were 40 incidences of animals contacting bait pellets: 50% rat, 32% hermit crab, 13% Ameiva lizard, and 5% insect. Trail cameras provide temporal and spatial information regarding the e?ectiveness of rodent removal, and the last rat pictured by trail cameras on Desecheo was six days after bait application began. Trail cameras revealed 30 incidences of animals contacting bait pellets 6–20 days after bait application began: 47% hermit crab, 37% Ameiva lizard, 13% insect, and 3% black crab. Despite viewing ~69,000 images from trail cameras, lizards were never pictured consuming bait on Desecheo; therefore, any brodifacoum exposure to Desecheo lizards likely occurred via secondary pathways (e.g. consumption of contaminated insects). Scaling up, we estimate that > 75% of the total bait distributed on Desecheo was not consumed by rats. Trail cameras help inform the hazards of rodenticide use and can be easily incorporated into rodent removal operations.
Applying lessons learnt from tropical rodent eradications: a second attempt to remove invasive rats from Desecheo National Wildlife Refuge, Puerto Rico
Biodiversity Conservation, BRB
Available Online

Figuerola-Hernandez, C.E.

,

Griffiths, R.

,

Herrera-Giraldo, J.L.

,

Howald, G.R.

,

Keitt, B.

,

Silander, S.

,

Swinnerton, K.

,

Will, D.J.

2019
The introduction of invasive rats, goats, and rhesus macaques to Desecheo National Wildlife Refuge, Puerto Rico led to the extirpation of regionally signifi cant seabird colonies and negatively impacted plant and endemic reptile species. In 2012, following the successful removal of goats and macaques from Desecheo, an attempt to remove black rats using aerially broadcast rodenticide and bait stations was unsuccessful. A review of the operation suggested that the most likely contributors to the failure were: unusually high availability of alternative foods resulting from higher than average rainfall, and insufficient bait availability. In 2016, a second, successful attempt to remove rats was conducted that incorporated best practice guidelines developed during a workshop that focused on addressing the higher failure rate observed when removing rats from tropical islands. Project partners developed a decision-making process to assess the risks to success posed by environmental conditions and established go/no-go decision points leading up to implementation. Observed environmental conditions appeared suitable, and the operation was completed using aerial broadcast of bait in two applications with a target sowing rate of 34 kg/ha separated by 22 days. Application rates achieved on the ground were stratified such that anticipated high risk areas in the cliff s and valleys received additional bait. We consider the following to be key to the success of the second attempt: 1) monitoring environmental conditions prior to the operation, and proceeding only if conditions were conducive to success, 2) reinterpretation of bait availability data using the lower 99% confidence interval to inform application rates and ensure sufficient coverage across the entire island, 3) treating the two applications as independent, 4) increasing the interval between applications, 5) seeking regulatory approval to give the operational team sufficient flexibility to ensure a minimum application rate at every point on the island, and 6) being responsive to operational monitoring and making any necessary adjustments.