Conservation Fencing Research Articles

Determining the impacts of conservation fencing on woma pythons (Aspidites ramsayi)

Context Fenced conservation reserves are an effective management tool for the conservation of many threatened species. However, conservation fencing is known to inadvertently affect non-target species, ranging from barrier effects to direct mortality. There is a paucity of information on the negative impacts of fencing on reptiles. Aims Using the woma python, a species of conservation significance, this research aimed to improve our knowledge of how reptiles interact with fences. Methods The spatial ecology of womas was explored in relation to fencing at the Wild Deserts project partnership site, a rabbit-, cat- and fox-proof fenced area of Sturt National Park in arid Australia. A 6-year dataset of opportunistic observations of womas at the study site were analysed for demographic, spatial and temporal patterns in woma fence interactions. Nine adult pythons were radiotracked over a year to assess space use in relation to fencing. Key results Twenty-two per cent of all opportunistic woma observations at the site were mortalities associated with entanglements. All 20 entanglement deaths were in 30-mm netting despite 50-mm netting comprising lower segments of 21% of the fence network. Fencing encounters were greatest in dune habitats and during summer and autumn. Fence crossings were infrequent among telemetered pythons and most encounters did not result in entanglement, with four of the nine individuals recorded to have crossed the fence successfully, despite one mortality. Conclusions Thirty-millimetre netting, particularly in areas of netting overlap, represents an entanglement risk to womas. Implications This research is applicable to the management of conservation fences and can be extended to other large snake and reptile species. The impacts of small-aperture netting on large snakes and other non-target species should be considered in the planning phases for conservation fencing and mitigation strategies should be sought in the planning phases where possible. Large-aperture netting is preferable to 30-mm netting for pythons, where exclusion of rabbits is not necessary. However, larger netting apertures may disproportionately affect other non-target species such as bearded dragons.

From threatened to threatening: Impacts of a reintroduced predator on reintroduced prey

AbstractDespite the recent global increase in projects utilizing conservation fencing, reintroductions of predators to fenced conservation reserves are rare. Reintroducing threatened predators into closed ecosystems raises potential issues of overabundance, population viability and inbreeding. In particular, impacts to resident prey species are not well studied across predator reintroductions worldwide, in part due to the difficulties in measuring predator impacts without adequate control areas. Over the 4 years following release, we used multiple lines of evidence and a paired treatment and control area to assess the potential impact of a reintroduced threatened predator, the western quoll, on four reintroduced threatened mammal species in a fenced reserve. Diet analysis, radio‐tracking and direct observation suggested that quolls killed and consumed all four reintroduced threatened native prey species, but two of these prey species (bettongs and bandicoots) were preferred prey. Abundance indices of these two prey species declined in parts of the reserve where quolls were present relative to control areas, yet local extinction did not occur. Quoll hunting behaviour suggested that these preferences may be driven, in part, by differences in the detectability and accessibility of similar‐sized prey. Dietary selection for threatened prey was reduced at times when native rodents, a highly preferred prey species, were in high abundance. The presence of rodents, coupled with the quoll‐exclusion control area and carcass dumps, may have protected reintroduced threatened prey from local extinction. Predator reintroductions to fenced reserves may help maintain ecosystem balance; however, predators may be incompatible with conservation of some threatened prey species unless alternative common prey are present or intensive management actions are implemented.

High‐resolution mapping of rabbit (Oryctolagus cuniculus) densities for targeted conservation management

Abstract Despite the staggering economic and ecological impacts of invasive animals, maps of their distribution are often only broad generalisations. Detailed knowledge about the spatial distribution of pest animals is crucial to efficiently reduce their numbers in open landscapes where no conservation fencing, or natural boundaries exist. Our case study tests a random but spatially balanced transect design to collect data on the distribution of the European rabbit (Oryctolagus cuniculus), a major destructive pest species in Australian ecosystems, and create distribution maps in relation to abiotic and biotic features. We surveyed an area of 650 km2 in the semi‐arid Flinders Ranges of South Australia using 95 transects (1.4 km length by 50 m width), that were placed with a method originally developed for surveying the ocean‐floor and applied for the first time in terrestrial ecosystems. According to a hurdle model fitted to our data set, the presence of rabbit warrens is influenced by geology, vegetation cover and the topographic wetness index, whereas the number of holes per warren depends on the ruggedness of the terrain, the vegetation cover and whether it has previously been destroyed. The model predicted the numbers of rabbit holes with up to 96.4% accuracy and at a previously unavailable resolution, providing a significant improvement in detail of the distribution of this feral animal. Synthesis and applications: A reliable, high‐resolution map of the distribution of rabbit densities was generated with surveying of less than 1% of the study area, information that can now be used to direct targeted conservation management efforts. This method is highly accurate and can still be improved in future studies.

Turtles in trouble. Conservation ecology and priorities for Australian freshwater turtles

AbstractThe Australian freshwater turtle fauna is dominated by species in the family Chelidae. The extant fauna comprises a series of distinct lineages, each of considerable antiquity, relicts of a more extensive and perhaps diverse fauna that existed when wetter climes prevailed. Several phylogenetically distinctive species are restricted to single, often small, drainage basins, which presents challenges for their conservation. Specific threats include water resource development, which alters the magnitude, frequency, and timing of flows and converts lentic to lotic habitat via dams and weirs, fragmentation of habitat, sedimentation, nutrification, and a reduction in the frequency and extent of floodplain flooding. Drainage of wetlands and altered land use are of particular concern for some species that are now very restricted in range and critically endangered. The introduced European red fox is a devastatingly efficient predator of turtle nests and can have a major impact on recruitment. In the north, species such as the northern snake‐necked turtle are heavily depredated by feral pigs. Other invasive animals and aquatic weeds dramatically alter freshwater habitats, with consequential impacts on freshwater turtles. Novel pathogens such as viruses have brought at least one species to the brink of extinction. Species that routinely migrate across land are impacted by structural simplification of habitat, reduction in availability of terrestrial refugia, fencing (including conservation fencing), and in some areas, by high levels of road mortality. We report on the listing process and challenges for listing freshwater turtles under the Australian Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act, summarize the state of knowledge relevant to listing decisions, identify the key threatening processes impacting turtles, and identify key knowledge gaps that impede the setting of priorities. We also focus on how to best incorporate First Nations Knowledge into decisions on listing and discuss opportunities to engage Indigenous communities in on‐ground work to achieve conservation outcomes.

Simple fence modification increases land movement prospects for freshwater turtles on floodplains

Installing conservation fences to prohibit feral animal access to wetlands can become a barrier for non‐target species of interest. We collected 161 turtles (Chelodina rugosa, Emydura subglobosa worrelli, Myuchelys latisternum) from twenty floodplain and riverine wetlands during post‐wet (June–August) and late‐dry season (November–December) surveys (2015–2018) in northern Australia. Wetlands were fenced (150 × 150 mm square, 1.05 m high wire mesh) or unfenced around the wet perimeter. Ninety‐seven percent of individuals caught in either fenced or unfenced wetlands had a shell carapace width greater than mesh width, of these 44 (46%) were captured inside fenced wetlands, while 50 were caught in unfenced wetlands. The remaining 35 turtles were smaller than 150 mm and would likely pass easily through fence mesh. Sixty‐five turtles partook in a fencing manipulative experiment. Turtles with carapace widths wider than mesh often successfully escaped through fences by lifting one side of their shell and passing diagonally through the mesh. In a second experiment where a piece of vertical wire (1500 × 300 mm) was removed, turtles located ‘gates' after prospecting and fitting through meshing areas that were too small to pass. Ninety‐two percent of turtles were able to locate and pass through gates, while 8% failed to locate a gate after 2 h. Gates applied every 4 m showed an 83% passage rate, every 2 m was 91%, and every 1 m was 100%. Combing field and manipulative experiments revealed that large turtles will prospect and move along a fence until they find suitable passage, which has important consequences when considering that gates could be easily retrofitted to existing sites, as well in new fencing programs, which has enormous positive conservation benefits for turtles in an already challenging and changing floodplain environment.

Quantifying wildlife responses to conservation fencing in East Africa

The fencing of protected areas is increasing worldwide. However, the implementation of fences for conservation has outpaced scientific assessment of their effectiveness, non-target impacts, and long-term costs. We assessed landscape predictors of fence crossing sites and employed camera traps over a one-year period to investigate wildlife responses to a conservation fence around Lake Nakuru National Park, Kenya. Specifically, we measured the impact of the fence on wild mammal movement, and the temporal impacts of fence maintenance on wildlife crossings and behavior. Cameras captured more than 65,000 detections of animals approaching fences, with 3626 observed crossings over 2818 trap nights at 19 sites. Using these data, we developed a guide to classifying fence-specific mammal behaviors. Thirty-eight wild mammal species approached known weak points in the fence, and 27 species were recorded crossing the fence. No single environmental variable predicted detection or fence crossing points for all species, but seasonality, human activity, habitat visibility, and proximity to an adjacent protected area were each correlated with species-specific crossing locations. Additionally, breaches of repaired fence-crossing locations occurred within days of maintenance. We conclude that popular, ‘one-size-fits-all’, conservation fence designs may be ineffective and costly for restraining movement of many wildlife species. We recommend that those deploying conservation fences start with clearly articulated management goals, that fence maintenance be informed by taxa-specific tendencies to breach fences, and that managers consider the strategic creation of wildlife corridors, overpasses, or ungulate-proof fences to link fenced protected areas with surrounding habitat.

Expansion of Vertebrate Pest Exclusion Fencing and Its Potential Benefits for Threatened Fauna Recovery in Australia.

Simple SummaryGlobally, there is a need to preserve threatened species before they disappear. The management of these species is often aided, particularly in Australia, by the addition of exclusion fences that prevent the movement of invasive or pest predators and competitors into the conservation area. Widespread use of conservation fences is limited by the availability of suitable conservation land and the relatively high costs of such fencing. Here, we discuss the potential conservation benefit of pest exclusion fences erected on agricultural land. We assess the spatial overlap of existing agricultural exclusion fences (known as “cluster fences”) with the potential habitat of listed threatened species and consider whether or not identified threats to these species are potentially alleviated within cluster fences. We find that there are several species that face threats which may be alleviated with cluster fences and propose that active recovery of threatened species on fenced agricultural land be seriously considered.The global effort to conserve threatened species relies heavily on our ability to separate these species from the processes that threaten them, and a common tool used for this purpose is exclusion fencing. In Australia, pest animal exclusion fencing has been repeatedly used on conservation land on a small scale to successfully exclude introduced predators and competitors from threatened native fauna populations. However, in recent years, “cluster fencing” on agricultural land has re-emerged on a large scale and is used by livestock producers seeking to reduce predation losses by dingoes (Canis familiaris) and manage total grazing pressure from native and introduced herbivores, including red kangaroos (Osphranter rufus). Given that the primary threats to at-risk native fauna are also predation and overgrazing, there may be potential for cluster fencing on livestock land to achieve additional fauna conservation benefits. Understanding the amount, location and potential conservation value of cluster fenced livestock land is critical for determining how these areas might contribute to broader threatened fauna recovery goals. Drawing from publicly available databases maintained by the Australian Government, we assessed the spatial overlap of threatened species’ distributions with 105 cluster fences erected in Queensland since 2013, which cover 65,901 km2 of land. These cluster fenced areas represent 18 biogeographic subregions and may contain 28 extant threatened mammals, birds and reptiles including 18 vulnerable species, 7 endangered species and 3 critically endangered species. An average of nine threatened species or their habitats were identified per cluster, and over three quarters (78.6%) of these species face at least one threat that is being mitigated within clusters. The true status of threatened and pest species within clusters is largely unknown or unrecorded in most cases, but some examples of pest eradication and threatened species recovery are already emerging. Given the vast size of the cluster fenced estate, the many different biomes and species that it represents and the nature of the threats being removed within these fenced areas, we contend that agricultural cluster fencing may offer an unprecedented opportunity to advance threatened fauna conservation goals for some species at scales previously thought impossible and should be a research priority for threatened species managers.

Responses of carnivore assemblages to decentralized conservation approaches in a South African landscape

Abstract Conservation efforts in South Africa play out across multi‐use landscapes where formal protected areas coexist with private wildlife business (ecotourism and/or hunting) in a human‐dominated matrix. Despite the persistence of highly diverse carnivore guilds, management idiosyncrasies are often orientated towards charismatic large predators and assemblage‐level patterns remain largely unexplored. We conducted an extensive camera‐trap survey in a natural quasi‐experimental setting in KwaZulu‐Natal, South Africa. We sampled across a protection gradient characterized by a provincial protected area (highest and formal protection status), a private ecotourism reserve, game ranches and traditional communal areas (lowest protected status). We evaluated assemblage‐level and species‐specific responses of free‐ranging carnivores to the varying management contexts and associated environmental gradients. Despite similar assemblage composition between management contexts, site‐scale carnivore richness and occupancy rates were greater in the formal protected area than adjacent private reserve and game ranches. Carnivore occupancy was more similar between these private wildlife areas, although putative problem species were more common in the private reserve, and contrasted with depauperate assemblages in least protected communal lands. Variation in carnivore occupancy probabilities was largely driven by land use contexts, that is, the level and nature of protection, relative to underlying fine‐scale landscape attributes (e.g. distance to conservation fences) or apex predator populations. Synthesis and applications. Our findings provide convincing empirical support for the added value of multi‐tenure conservation estates augmenting and connecting South Africa's protected areas. However, our emphasis on free‐ranging carnivores exemplifies the importance of maintaining areas under long‐term formal protection and the risks with viewing lucrative wildlife business as a conservation panacea. We suggest that unmanaged carnivore species be the formal components of carnivore reintroduction and recovery programmes to better gauge the complementary conservation role of South Africa's private land.

Long-term benefits and short-term costs: small vertebrate responses to predator exclusion and native mammal reintroductions in south-western New South Wales, Australia

Abstract ContextThe success of conservation fences at protecting reintroduced populations of threatened mammals from introduced predators has prompted an increase in the number and extent of fenced exclosures. Excluding introduced species from within conservation fences could also benefit components of insitu faunal assemblages that are prey for introduced predators, such as reptiles and small mammals. Conversely, reintroduced mammals may compete with smaller mammals and reptiles for resources, or even prey on them. AimsIn a 10-year study from 2008, we examine how small terrestrial vertebrates respond to the exclusion of introduced predators, the feral cat (Felis catus) and red fox (Vulpes Vulpes), introduced herbivores and the reintroduction of regionally extinct mammal species. MethodsDifferences in the yearly relative abundance of reptiles and mammals according to habitat type and whether sites were fenced or not, were tested using multivariate generalised linear models. Next, we calculated univariate P-values to identify individual species that showed significant relationships, positive and negative, with any of the explanatory variables. Key resultsTotal captures of reptiles were lower inside the conservation fence in all years, whereas total captures of small mammals were markedly higher inside the fenced area, notably in dasyurids. ConclusionOur results showed that conservation fences can deliver benefits for some fauna (but not all) beyond facilitating the reintroduction of highly threatened mammals. ImplicationsOur results demonstrated the consequential impacts of introduced predators on the Australian small mammal fauna, and showed that predator-exclusion fences can be an effective conservation intervention for this guild.

Envisioning the future with ‘compassionate conservation’: An ominous projection for native wildlife and biodiversity

The ‘Compassionate Conservation’ movement is gaining momentum through its promotion of ‘ethical’ conservation practices based on self-proclaimed principles of ‘first-do-no-harm’ and ‘individuals matter’. We argue that the tenets of ‘Compassionate Conservation’ are ideological - that is, they are not scientifically proven to improve conservation outcomes, yet are critical of the current methods that do. In this paper we envision a future with ‘Compassionate Conservation’ and predict how this might affect global biodiversity conservation. Taken literally, ‘Compassionate Conservation’ will deny current conservation practices such as captive breeding, introduced species control, biocontrol, conservation fencing, translocation, contraception, disease control and genetic introgression. Five mainstream conservation practices are used to illustrate the far-reaching and dire consequences for global biodiversity if governed by ‘Compassionate Conservation’. We acknowledge the important role of animal welfare science in conservation practices but argue that ‘Compassionate Conservation’ aligns more closely with animal liberation principles protecting individuals over populations. Ultimately we fear that a world of ‘Compassionate Conservation’ could stymie the global conservation efforts required to meet international biodiversity targets derived from evidenced based practice, such as the Aichi targets developed by the Convention on Biological Diversity and adopted by the International Union for the Conservation of Nature and the United Nations.

Exploring the internal and external wildlife gradients created by conservation fences.

Spillover effects are an expansion of conservation benefits beyond protected areas through dispersal of species that reside within. They have been well documented in marine but not terrestrial systems. To understand the effects on wildlife created by conservation fences, we explored the internal and external gradients of activity in mammal, reptile, and bird species at a conservation reserve in arid Australia that is fenced to exclude invasive rabbits (Oryctolagus cuniculus), cats (Felis catus), and foxes (Vulpes vulpes). Two methods were used: counts of animal tracks along transects on sand dunes and captures at pitfall-trapping sites. In both cases, sites were spaced at different distances from the reserve fenceline inside and outside the reserve. We recorded a range of spillover, source-sink, step, and barrier effects that combined to create a zone within and around the reserve with fence-induced species-specific wildlife gradients. Two endemic rodents but none of the 4 mammal species reintroduced to the reserve showed positive spillover effects. Barrier effects, where activity was highest close to the fence, were recorded for the feral cat and native bettong (Bettongia lesueur), species that could not breach the fence. In comparison, some reptiles and native mammal species that could permeate the fence displayed source-sink effects; that is, their activity levels were reduced close to the fence likely due to constant emigration to the side with lower density. Activity of some reptiles was lowest at sites inside the reserve and gradually increased at outside sites with distance from the fence, a gradient likely related to trophic cascades triggered by predator exclusion. Our result shows that fenced reserves can create overlapping layers of species-specific gradients related to each species' ability to permeate the fence and its varying susceptibility to threats. Managers should be aware that these gradients may extend for several kilometers either side of the fence and that not all contained species will increase in abundance. Creating wider conservation benefits may require increased fence permeability and threat reduction outside the fence.

Deconstructing compassionate conservation.

Compassionate conservation focuses on 4 tenets: first, do no harm; individuals matter; inclusivity of individual animals; and peaceful coexistence between humans and animals. Recently, compassionate conservation has been promoted as an alternative to conventional conservation philosophy. We believe examples presented by compassionate conservationists are deliberately or arbitrarily chosen to focus on mammals; inherently not compassionate; and offer ineffective conservation solutions. Compassionate conservation arbitrarily focuses on charismatic species, notably large predators and megaherbivores. The philosophy is not compassionate when it leaves invasive predators in the environment to cause harm to vastly more individuals of native species or uses the fear of harm by apex predators to terrorize mesopredators. Hindering the control of exotic species (megafauna, predators) in situ will not improve the conservation condition of the majority of biodiversity. The positions taken by so-called compassionate conservationists on particular species and on conservation actions could be extended to hinder other forms of conservation, including translocations, conservation fencing, and fertility control. Animal welfare is incredibly important to conservation, but ironically compassionate conservation does not offer the best welfare outcomes to animals and is often ineffective in achieving conservation goals. Consequently, compassionate conservation may threaten public and governmental support for conservation because of the limited understanding of conservation problems by the general public.

Killing for Conservation - Plenary 2

Following the second session of the forum, a question and answer session was facilitated by Paul Willis. The presentations covered by this plenary session were: John Woinarski (Charles Darwin University) - Killing Peter to save Paul: when is it appropriate to cull native species to benefit other native species?Ricky Spencer (Western Sydney University) - What ‘impact’ will the killing of two million cats by 2020 have on feral cat populations?Rod Kavanagh (Australian Wildlife Conservancy) - Conservation fencing: little cost but significant benefits for threatened native species.Libby Robin (Australian National University) - Eradicating the ugly.George R Wilson and Melanie Edwards (Australian Wildlife Services) - Professional kangaroo population control leads to better animal welfare, conservation outcomes and avoids waste. (Paper included post forum.)

Understanding predator densities for successful co‐existence of alien predators and threatened prey

AbstractThe high failure rate of threatened species translocations has prompted many managers to fence areas to protect wildlife from introduced predators. However, conservation fencing is expensive, restrictive and exacerbates prey naïveté reducing the chance of future co‐existence between native prey and introduced predators. Here, we ask whether two globally threatened mammal species protected in fenced reserves, with a history of predation‐driven decline and reintroduction failure, could co‐exist with introduced predators. We defined co‐existence as population persistence for at least 3 years and successful recruitment. We manipulated the density of feral cats within a large fenced paddock and measured the impact on abundance and reproduction of 353 reintroduced burrowing bettongs and 47 greater bilbies over 3 years. We increased cat densities from 0.038 to 0.46 per square km and both threatened species survived, reproduced and increased their population size. However, a previous reintroduction trial of 66 bettongs into the same paddock found one red fox (Vulpes vulpes), at a density of 0.027 per square km, drove the bettong population extinct within 12 months. Our results show that different predator species vary in their impact and that despite a history of reintroduction failure, threatened mammal species can co‐exist with low densities of feral cats. There may be a threshold density below which it is possible to maintain unfenced populations of reintroduced marsupials. Understanding the numerical relationships between population densities of introduced predators and threatened species is urgently needed if these species are to be re‐established at landscape scales. Such knowledge will enable a priori assessment of the risk of reintroduction failure thereby increasing the likelihood of reintroduction success and reducing the financial and ethical cost of failed translocations.

Patterns of habitat use by three threatened mammals 10 years after reintroduction into a fenced reserve free of introduced predators

Introduced predators are a major driver of global biodiversity loss. Over the last 200 years, the distribution and abundance of critical-weight-range mammals in Australia has declined, with many species now locally extinct or confined to small isolated refuges. From 2004 onwards as part of a major conservation initiative, the Australian Wildlife Conservancy reintroduced three threatened mammal species, the Greater Bilby (Macrotis lagotis), Bridled Nailtail Wallaby (Onychogalea fraenata) and Numbat (Myrmecobius fasciatus), into an 8000-hectare area protected by conservation fencing at Scotia Sanctuary in semi-arid New South Wales. Our study examined habitat selection for these species following multiple generations in a fenced area free of introduced predators.We used nocturnal spotlighting and diurnal search transect data collected over a two-year period to identify habitat preferences for these species, a decade after release. We used a Distance Sampling approach to examine differences in detectability between vegetation types, and Chi-Squared tests to identify differences in habitat use relative to availability. We used a Utilization Distribution (UD) analysis to identify how the spatial distribution of habitat affected its usage at Scotia Sanctuary. Habitat use of each species was compared with the results of a study conducted shortly after initial releases.We found that patterns of habitat use for these species differed to those identified following their initial release. We found a strong preference for shrub vegetation communities for all species relative to availability, as well as some variation in habitat preferences between two fenced areas (Stage 1 and Stage 2). The UD analysis revealed patterns of habitat use for one species (Bilby) that were not apparent from Chi-squared analysis, highlighting the importance of considering the spatial heterogeneity and proximity of different vegetation types when identifying species preferences.Our results demonstrate that in the absence of introduced predators these threatened species are able to use all of the vegetation types available, and by altering their habitat use over time, to persist following reintroduction into contemporary contexts within their historic ranges.

Minimizing species extinctions through strategic planning for conservation fencing

Conservation fences are an increasingly common management action, particularly for species threatened by invasive predators. However, unlike many conservation actions, fence networks are expanding in an unsystematic manner, generally as a reaction to local funding opportunities or threats. We conducted a gap analysis of Australia's large predator-exclusion fence network by examining translocation of Australian mammals relative to their extinction risk. To address gaps identified in species representation, we devised a systematic prioritization method for expanding the conservation fence network that explicitly incorporated population viability analysis and minimized expected species' extinctions. The approach was applied to New South Wales, Australia, where the state government intends to expand the existing conservation fence network. Existing protection of species in fenced areas was highly uneven; 67% of predator-sensitive species were unrepresented in the fence network. Our systematic prioritization yielded substantial efficiencies in that it reduced expected number of species extinctions up to 17 times more effectively than ad hoc approaches. The outcome illustrates the importance of governance in coordinating management action when multiple projects have similar objectives and rely on systematic methods rather than expanding networks opportunistically.

“A Place of Pain and Gain”: Exploring the Dynamics of Resistance in the Creation of Sengwe Tshipise Wilderness Corridor, Southeast Zimbabwe

ABSTRACTThis article examines the relationship between place attachment and resistance during participatory planning of the Sengwe Tshipise Wilderness Corridor, located in southeast Zimbabwe, a region that falls within the Great Limpopo Transfrontier Conservation Area. Field research was conducted from July to December 2013 using 69 semistructured interviews, seven focus-group discussions, and analysis of secondary data. By following the dominant narratives articulated by villagers affected by this Corridor, we illustrate the multiple ways in which place attachment becomes part of everyday politics of resistance. Results show that a strong place-based identity is at the center of narratives deployed by villagers displaced by war, conservation, and veterinary fencing restrictions. Through deploying this place-based identity, communities collectively influenced both the spatial extent of the corridor and institutional governance arrangements. This article contributes to debates on the role of community agency in the implementation of transfrontier conservation areas.

Reptile bycatch in a pest-exclusion fence established for wildlife reintroductions

Conservation fences have been used as a tool to stop threatening processes from acting against endangered wildlife, yet little is known of the impacts of fences on non-target native species. In this study, we intensively monitored a pest-exclusion fence for 16 months to assess impacts on a reptile community in south-eastern Australia. We registered 1052 reptile records of six species along the fence. Encounters and mortality were greatest for eastern long-necked turtles (Chelodina longicollis), whereas impacts on lizards (Tiliqua rugosa, Tiliqua scincoides, Pogona barbata, Egernia cunninghami) and snakes (Pseudonaja textilis) were more moderate. We recorded several Chelodina longicollis recaptures at the fence and many of these were later found dead at the fence, indicating persistent attempts to navigate past the fence. We conservatively estimate that the fence resulted in the death of 3.3% and disrupted movements of 20.9% of the turtle population within the enclosure. Movement disruption and high mortality were also observed for turtles attempting to enter the nature reserve, effectively isolating the reserve population from others in the wider landscape. Of 98 turtle mortalities, the most common cause of death was overheating, followed by predation, vehicular collision, and entanglement. Turtle interactions were clustered in areas with more wetlands and less urban development, and temporally correlated with high rainfall and solar radiation, and low temperature. Thus, managers could focus at times and locations to mitigate impacts on turtles. We believe the impact of fences on non-target species is a widespread and unrecognized threat, and suggest that future and on-going conservation fencing projects consider risks to non-target native species, and where possible, apply mitigation strategies that maintain natural movement corridors and minimize mortality risk.

Choosing cost-effective locations for conservation fences in the local landscape

Context Exclosure fences are widely used to reintroduce locally extinct animals. These fences function either as permanent landscape-scale areas free from most predators, or as small-scale temporary acclimatisation areas for newly translocated individuals to be ‘soft released’ into the wider landscape. Existing research can help managers identify the best design for their exclosure fence, but there are currently no methods available to help identify the optimal location for these exclosures in the local landscape (e.g. within a property). Aims We outline a flexible decision-support tool that can help managers choose the best location for a proposed exclosure fence. We applied this method to choose the site of a predator-exclusion fence within the proposed Lorna Glen (Matuwa) Conservation Park in the rangelands of central Western Australia. Methods The decision was subject to a set of economic, ecological and political constraints that were applied sequentially. The final exclosure fence location, chosen from among those sites that satisfied the constraints, optimised conservation outcomes by maximising the area enclosed. Key results From a prohibitively large set of potential exclosure locations, the series of constraints reduced the number of candidates down to 32. When ranked by the total area enclosed, one exclosure location was clearly superior. Conclusions By describing the decision-making process explicitly and quantitatively, and systematically considering each of the candidate solutions, our approach identifies an efficient exclosure fence location via a repeatable and transparent process. Implications The construction of an exclusion fence is an expensive management option, and therefore needs to convincingly demonstrate a high expected return-on-investment. A systematic approach for choosing the location of an exclosure fence provides managers with a decision that can be justified to funding sources and stakeholders.

Frozen Evolution: Or, That's not the Way It Is, Mr. Darwin: A Farewell to Selfish Gene. By Jaroslav Flegr; translated by, Madeleine Štulíková. Prague (Czech Republic): Charles University in Prague Press. $20.99 (paper). 225 p.; ill.; index of texts in grey boxes and general index. ISBN: 978‐80‐86561‐73‐8. [Originally published as Zamrzlá evoluce aneb, Je to jinak, pane Darwin, by Academia,

Previous articleNext article No AccessNew Biological BooksFrozen Evolution: Or, That's not the Way It Is, Mr. Darwin: A Farewell to Selfish Gene. By Jaroslav Flegr; translated by, Madeleine Štulíková. Prague (Czech Republic): Charles University in Prague Press. $20.99 (paper). 225 p.; ill.; index of texts in grey boxes and general index. ISBN: 978‐80‐86561‐73‐8. [Originally published as Zamrzlá evoluce aneb, Je to jinak, pane Darwin, by Academia, Prague, Czech Republic, 2006.] 2008.Dan GraurDan GraurBiology & Biochemistry, University of Houston, Houston, Texas Search for more articles by this author Biology & Biochemistry, University of Houston, Houston, TexasPDFPDF PLUSFull Text Add to favoritesDownload CitationTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints Share onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail SectionsMoreDetailsFiguresReferencesCited by The Quarterly Review of Biology Volume 85, Number 4December 2010 Published in association with Stony Brook University Article DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1086/656859 Views: 29Total views on this site Citations: 15Citations are reported from Crossref Copyright © 2010 by The University of Chicago Press. All rights reserved.PDF download Crossref reports the following articles citing this article:John Augusteyn, Maree Rich, Georgeanna Story, Barry Nolan Canids potentially threaten bilbies at Astrebla Downs National Park, Australian Mammalogy 43, no.33 (Jan 2021): 300.https://doi.org/10.1071/AM20034Manu E. Saunders, Deborah S. Bower, Sarah Mika, John T. Hunter Condition thresholds in Australia’s threatened ecological community listings hinder conservation of dynamic ecosystems, Pacific Conservation Biology 27, no.33 (Jan 2021): 221.https://doi.org/10.1071/PC20040Ian J. Radford, Leigh-Ann Woolley, Ben Corey, Tom Vigilante, , Ed Hatherley, Richard Fairman, Karin Carnes, Antony N. Start Prescribed burning benefits threatened mammals in northern Australia, Biodiversity and Conservation 29, no.9-109-10 (Jun 2020): 2985–3007.https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-020-02010-9Benjamin Feit, Anna Feit, Mike Letnic Apex Predators Decouple Population Dynamics Between Mesopredators and Their Prey, Ecosystems 22, no.77 (Mar 2019): 1606–1617.https://doi.org/10.1007/s10021-019-00360-2Jennifer D. Noble, Scott L. Collins, Alesia J. Hallmark, Karin Maldonado, Blair O. Wolf, Seth D. Newsome Foraging strategies of individual silky pocket mice over a boom–bust cycle in a stochastic dryland ecosystem, Oecologia 190, no.33 (Jun 2019): 569–578.https://doi.org/10.1007/s00442-019-04432-xAnnabel L. Smith Successional changes in trophic interactions support a mechanistic model of post-fire population dynamics, Oecologia 186, no.11 (Nov 2017): 129–139.https://doi.org/10.1007/s00442-017-4016-zMike Letnic, Anna Feit, David M. Forsyth Strength of a Trophic Cascade Between an Apex Predator, Mammalian Herbivore and Grasses in a Desert Ecosystem Does Not Vary with Temporal Fluctuations in Primary Productivity, Ecosystems 21, no.11 (Apr 2017): 153–165.https://doi.org/10.1007/s10021-017-0141-0Zunchi Liu, Tong Liu, Hang Yu, Zhiquan Han, Tao Wang, Huafeng Liu Efficient sampling of plant diversity in arid deserts using non-parametric estimators, Biodiversity and Conservation 26, no.55 (Jan 2017): 1225–1242.https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-017-1296-xHelen P. Waudby, Sophie Petit Small Australian desert vertebrate responses to grazing intensity during La Niña, Ecological Research 30, no.44 (May 2015): 715–722.https://doi.org/10.1007/s11284-015-1274-2Stephanie J. S. Yip, Maree-Asta Rich, Chris R. Dickman Diet of the feral cat, Felis catus, in central Australian grassland habitats during population cycles of its principal prey, Mammal Research 60, no.11 (Dec 2014): 39–50.https://doi.org/10.1007/s13364-014-0208-7Aaron C. Greenville, Glenda M. Wardle, Bobby Tamayo, Chris R. Dickman Bottom-up and top-down processes interact to modify intraguild interactions in resource-pulse environments, Oecologia 175, no.44 (Jun 2014): 1349–1358.https://doi.org/10.1007/s00442-014-2977-8Thomas M. Newsome, Guy-Anthony Ballard, Peter J. S. Fleming, Remy van de Ven, Georgeanna L. Story, Christopher R. Dickman Human-resource subsidies alter the dietary preferences of a mammalian top predator, Oecologia 175, no.11 (Feb 2014): 139–150.https://doi.org/10.1007/s00442-014-2889-7David L. Dunkerley Vegetation Mosaics of Arid Western New South Wales, Australia: Considerations of Their Origin and Persistence, (May 2013): 315–345.https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-5727-1_12Chris R. Dickman Fences or Ferals? Benefits and Costs of Conservation Fencing in Australia, (Oct 2011): 43–63.https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-0902-1_4Louise A. Pastro, Christopher R. Dickman, Mike Letnic Burning for biodiversity or burning biodiversity? Prescribed burn vs. wildfire impacts on plants, lizards, and mammals, Ecological Applications 21, no.88 (Dec 2011): 3238–3253.https://doi.org/10.1890/10-2351.1