Managing predation on ground-nesting birds: the effectiveness of nest exclosures
-
Published source details
Isaksson D., Wallander J. & Larsson M. (2007) Managing predation on ground-nesting birds: the effectiveness of nest exclosures. Biological Conservation, 136, 136-142.
Published source details Isaksson D., Wallander J. & Larsson M. (2007) Managing predation on ground-nesting birds: the effectiveness of nest exclosures. Biological Conservation, 136, 136-142.
Actions
This study is summarised as evidence for the following.
Action | Category | |
---|---|---|
Protect individual nests of ground-nesting birds Action Link |
||
Can nest protection increase nest abandonment? Action Link |
||
Can nest protection increase predation of adults and chicks? Action Link |
||
Physically protect nests with individual exclosures/barriers or provide shelters for chicks of waders Action Link |
-
Protect individual nests of ground-nesting birds
A replicated, randomized, controlled trial in 2002 and 2004 at three grazed pasture sites in south-west Sweden (Isaksson et al. 2007) found that nests protected with cages (truncated cone steel cages with 6.5-8.5 cm spacings between vertical bars and 4 x 4 cm steel netting on top) had significantly higher average daily survival rates than unprotected nests for both common redshank Tringa totanus (99.7% for 34 protected nests vs 96% for 32 unprotected nests in 2002) and northern lapwing Vanellus vanellus (99% for 37 protected nests vs 97% for 153 unprotected nests in 2002 and 2004). However, there was higher predation of adult redshank on protected nests and possibly higher abandonment by lapwings (nine redshank adults from eight protected nests were predated vs a single bird from 31 unprotected nests).
-
Can nest protection increase nest abandonment?
A replicated, randomised and controlled trial in 2002 and 2004 at three grazed pasture sites in south-west Sweden (Isaksson et al. 2007) found that there was a slight trend towards higher nest abandonment in northern lapwing Vanellus vanellus with protected nests (truncated cone steel cages with 6.5 – 8.5 cm spacing between vertical bars and 4 x 4 cm steel netting on top), but that the trend was not significant (3 of 37 caged nests abandoned vs. 2 of 153 non-caged nests). This study is also discussed in ‘Physically protect nests with individual exclosures/barriers’ and ‘Can nest protection increase nest abandonment?’
-
Can nest protection increase predation of adults and chicks?
A replicated, randomised and controlled trial in 2002 and 2004 at three grazed pasture sites in south-west Sweden (Isaksson et al. 2007) found that there were significantly higher predation rates on adult common redshank Tringa tetanus with protected nests (protected by truncated cone steel cages with 6.5 – 8.5 cm spacing between vertical bars and 4 x 4 cm steel netting on top) than for birds brooding at unprotected nests (nine adults from eight protected nests predated, from a total of 37 nests vs. a single bird from 31 unprotected nests). This study is also discussed in ‘Physically protect nests with individual exclosures/barriers’.
-
Physically protect nests with individual exclosures/barriers or provide shelters for chicks of waders
A replicated, randomised and controlled trial in 2002 and 2004 at three grazed pasture sites in south-west Sweden (Isaksson et al. 2007) found that nests provided cages (truncated cone steel cages with 6.5 – 8.5 cm spacings between vertical bars and 4 x 4 cm steel netting on top) had significantly higher average daily survival rates than unprotected nests in both common redshank Tringa totanus (99.7% for 34 protected nests vs. 96% for 32 unprotected nests in 2002) and northern lapwing Vanellus vanellus (99% for 37 protected nests vs. 97 for 153 unprotected nests in 2002 and 2004). However, there was higher predation of adult redshank on protected nests, and possibly higher abandonment by lapwings, see ‘Can nest protection increase predation of adults and chicks?’.
Output references
|