Fertility control to mitigate human-wildlife conflicts: A review

94Citations
Citations of this article
211Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

As human populations grow, conflicts with wildlife increase. Concurrently, concerns about the welfare, safety and environmental impacts of conventional lethal methods of wildlife management restrict the options available for conflict mitigation. In parallel, there is increasing interest in using fertility control to manage wildlife. The present review aimed at analysing trends in research on fertility control for wildlife, illustrating developments in fertility-control technologies and delivery methods of fertility-control agents, summarising the conclusions of empirical and theoretical studies of fertility control applied at the population level and offering criteria to guide decisions regarding the suitability of fertility control to mitigate human-wildlife conflicts. The review highlighted a growing interest in fertility control for wildlife, underpinned by increasing numbers of scientific studies. Most current practical applications of fertility control for wild mammals use injectable single-dose immunocontraceptive vaccines mainly aimed at sterilising females, although many of these vaccines are not yet commercially available. One oral avian contraceptive, nicarbazin, is commercially available in some countries. Potential new methods of remote contraceptive delivery include bacterial ghosts, virus-like particles and genetically modified transmissible and non-transmissible organisms, although none of these have yet progressed to field testing. In parallel, new species-specific delivery systems have been developed. The results of population-level studies of fertility control indicated that this approach may increase survival and affect social and spatial behaviour of treated animals, although the effects are species- and context-specific. The present studies suggested that a substantial initial effort is generally required to reduce population growth if fertility control is the sole wildlife management method. However, several empirical and field studies have demonstrated that fertility control, particularly of isolated populations, can be successfully used to limit population growth and reduce human-wildlife conflicts. In parallel, there is growing recognition of the possible synergy between fertility control and disease vaccination to optimise the maintenance of herd immunity in the management of wildlife diseases. The review provides a decision tree that can be used to determine whether fertility control should be employed to resolve specific human-wildlife conflicts. These criteria encompass public consultation, considerations about animal welfare and feasibility, evaluation of population responses, costs and sustainability. © CSIRO 2014.

References Powered by Scopus

Emerging infectious diseases of wildlife - Threats to biodiversity and human health

3259Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Feral pigs in Namadgi National Park, Australia: Dynamics, impacts and management

143Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Culling-induced social perturbation in Eurasian badgers Meles meles and the management of TB in cattle: An analysis of a critical problem in applied ecology

127Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Cited by Powered by Scopus

Wild boar populations up, numbers of hunters down? A review of trends and implications for Europe

603Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Biological control: Ecology and applications

320Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Wild ungulate overabundance in Europe: contexts, causes, monitoring and management recommendations

202Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Massei, G., & Cowan, D. (2014). Fertility control to mitigate human-wildlife conflicts: A review. Wildlife Research. CSIRO. https://doi.org/10.1071/WR13141

Readers' Seniority

Tooltip

PhD / Post grad / Masters / Doc 65

61%

Researcher 30

28%

Professor / Associate Prof. 7

7%

Lecturer / Post doc 5

5%

Readers' Discipline

Tooltip

Agricultural and Biological Sciences 69

57%

Environmental Science 30

25%

Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medic... 13

11%

Social Sciences 9

7%

Article Metrics

Tooltip
Social Media
Shares, Likes & Comments: 2

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free