DOCSLIB.ORG

Review of Canid Management in Australia for the Protection of Livestock and Wildlife — Potential Application to Coyote Management

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Review of Canid Management in Australia for the Protection of Livestock and Wildlife — Potential Application to Coyote Management University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln Wildlife Damage Management, Internet Center Sheep & Goat Research Journal for October 2004 Review of Canid Management in Australia for the Protection of Livestock and Wildlife — Potential Application to Coyote Management L. R. Allen Robert Wicks Pest Animal Research Centre, Department of Natural Resources and Mines, Queensland, Australia P. J. S. Fleming Orange Agricultural Institute, New South Wales, Australia, Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/icwdmsheepgoat Part of the Environmental Sciences Commons Allen, L. R. and Fleming, P. J. S., "Review of Canid Management in Australia for the Protection of Livestock and Wildlife — Potential Application to Coyote Management" (2004). Sheep & Goat Research Journal. 2. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/icwdmsheepgoat/2 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Wildlife Damage Management, Internet Center for at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in Sheep & Goat Research Journal by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. Review of Canid Management in Australia for the Protection of Livestock and Wildlife — Potential Application to Coyote Management L.R. Allen1 and P.J.S. Fleming2 1 Robert Wicks Pest Animal Research Centre, Department of Natural Resources and Mines, P.O. Box 318, Toowoomba, Queensland, Australia 4350 2 Vertebrate Pest Research Unit, NSW Agriculture, Orange Agricultural Institute, Forest Road, Orange, New South Wales, Australia, 2800 Keywords: Canid, Coyote, Dingo, ally every habitat across the Australian dogs handle sheep and goats. Management, Predation, Sheep, Toxi- continent and are absent from Tasmania The movement of prey is an essen- cant (Fleming et al., 2001). However, because tial stimulus for eliciting predation by of their longer association with Aus- canids (Fox, 1969). Big horn and Dall Introduction tralia, they are often regarded as a sheep (Ovis canadiensis and O. dalli) of “native” species (Davis, 2001). Wild North America scatter in the presence of Australia has two introduced canid domestic dogs have been present since wolves (Canis lupus lupus), their fleeing species — European red foxes (Vulpes the first European settlement in 1788 behavior eliciting an attack response by vulpes) and wild dogs (which include (Fleming et al., 2001) and hybridization wolves (Mech, 1988). Domestic goats dingoes, Canis lupus dingo, feral domestic with dingoes has been occurring ever and sheep have been selected from wild dogs C. l. familiaris and their hybrids). since (Corbett, 1995a, 2001). Despite species and also flee in the presence of Foxes were introduced into mainland the native status of dingoes, all wild dogs wild dogs. However, unlike their wild Australia in the 1860s and quickly and foxes are regarded and managed as caprinid relatives that can take refuge spread (Rolls, 1984; Jarman 1986). This pests on agricultural lands, i.e. outside of from predators amongst the rocky, rough dispersal and establishment is believed conservation areas. Pure dingoes alone terrain found in their natural habitat (for linked with the introduction and spread are afforded legislative protection in example Dall sheep, Frid, 1997), domes- of European wild rabbits (Oryctolagus areas set aside for conservation (Fleming tic sheep and goats have no defensive cunniculus) (Saunders et al., 1995). et al., 2001; Davis and Leys, 2001) yet behaviors of consequence. The instinc- Except in Tasmania, where previous feral dogs and hybrids effectively enjoy tive reaction to flee is disastrous for introductions appear to have been the same legislative protection in con- domestic livestock because they seldom unsuccessful, and in northern Australia, servation areas as dingoes, because they have quality refuge available and their where the climate is unsuitable and rab- cannot be managed separately. fleeing behavior triggers wild dog bits are essentially absent, foxes have attacks. In addition, Australian merinos, become established throughout in virtu- Impact of Canids on which comprise approximately 75% of ally all habitats including urban and res- the national flock of 104 million sheep idential environments (Saunders et al., Livestock Production: (Meat & Livestock Australia Limited, 1995). Within decades of their introduc- Wild Dogs 2000), are particularly susceptible tion, legislation was enacted proclaiming because their second anti-predator them as pests to agriculture, and more Wild dogs cost the grazing indus- tries of Australia millions of dollars response is to circle and form a mob. As recently, as a key threatening process to they circle, more of those on the outside endangered small mammals (NSW annually in production losses and con- trol expenses (Fleming et al., 2001; of the moving mob are exposed to the National Parks & Wildlife Service, predator (Fleming, 2001) and surplus 2001). This status has been enshrined in Whan, 2003). Production losses are highest in the sheep industry, followed killing, where one dog is responsible for subsequent legislation and strengthened predation in excess of nutritional by virtue of foxes being an introduced by the cattle and the goat industries (Fleming and Korn, 1989), reflecting requirements (for example Andelt et al., pest species rather than a native animal. 1980), often occurs. Because of surplus Dingoes are thought to have arrived the relative numbers of the three live- stock species nationally (Meat & Live- killing, the damage experienced by in Australia from Southeast Asia about sheep producers is not related to the 5000 years before present (Corbett, stock Australia Limited, 2000). Sheep and goats are more vulnerable to wild density of wild dogs, excepting that no 1995a). A number of reports have damage occurs in the absence of wild reviewed the origins, ecological signifi- dog predation than cattle. This is pri- marily due to two factors: (a) the flee- dogs (Fleming, 2001). cance of dingos, and their morphological Thomson (1992) observed that wild and genetic relationship to domestic ing and mobbing behavior of sheep and goats in response to the presence of wild dogs easily out-paced sheep subsequently dogs. Interested readers are referred to attacking 66% of the sheep they chased. Newsome et al. (1980) as one example. dogs; and (b) the hunting style of wild dogs and the efficiency at which wild This level of capture efficiency is excep- Like foxes they are also found in virtu- tionally high relative to other prey and Sheep & Goat Research Journal, Volume 19, 2004 97 at the higher end for other predators (Table 1). In fact, many of the sheep in Table 1. Capture Efficiency of Canids Attacking Prey. Thomson’s (1992) study were chased and outrun by wild dogs but not Capture attacked, the pursuing wild dog breaking Canid Prey Efficiency Reference off to pursue another sheep. Thomson Wild Dogs Sheep 66% Thomson 1992 concluded that there was no advantage Canis lupus dingo, for wild dogs to cooperatively hunt C.l. familiaris Cattle (Bos spp) 14% Thomson 1992 sheep. Kangaroos (Macropus spp) 9% Thomson 1992 Characteristics of wild dog preda- tion include: Wolves Elk (Cervus elephus) 15-26% Mech et al. 2001 • Relatively few of the sheep and Canis lupus lupus White-tailed deer goats killed or mauled by wild dogs are (Odocoileus virginianus) 25-63% Kolonosky 1972 eaten; • Of those sheep and goats that are African hunting dogs Ungulates (mostly eaten, generally little is consumed; and Gazella thompsonii) 85% Estes and Goddard 1967 • All wild dogs that enter sheep or goat grazing lands will eventually attack 2 or harass sheep and goats. Table 2. Predation loss of calves in baited and non-baited portions (>400 km ) This scenario has resulted in respec- of the same property (from Allen, In Preparation). tive State and Territory Governments independently developing management Predation Loss Predation Loss policies that regard sheep or goat pro- Site/Date Baited Area Non-Baited Area duction as being incompatible with the Mt Owen/ 1994 Nil Detected 8.8% presence of wild dogs. In contrast, atti- Mt Owen / 1995 15% Nil Detected tudes of beef cattle producers towards Mt Owen 1996 Nil Detected Nil Detected wild dog predation are diverse (Allen Mt Owen / 1997 Nil Detected Nil Detected and Sparkes, 2000). Part of the reason Strathmore/ 1995 11.3% Nil Detected for this diversity is the defensive behav- Strathmore/ 1996 32.1% Nil Detected ior of cattle in response to the presence Strathmore / 1997 Nil Detected Nil Detected of wild dogs — adult cattle cooperatively defend calves and/or charge wild dogs low, when below-average, annual rainfall wild dogs on individual cattle properties (Thomson, 1992; Corbett, 1995a). This had preceded, and most importantly, may not only be ineffective but counter- defensive behavior of cattle discourages when baited areas had been re-colonized productive. For example, for twenty wild dogs resulting in fewer attacks. by wild dogs (Allen, In Preparation). years 1968 to 1987 baiting programs Consequently, even though wild dogs are The study concluded that young, dis- were conducted on Ironhurst station more efficient at chasing and killing persing wild dogs were likely to re-colo- throughout the year yet they continued calves than preferred natural prey such nize after baiting, and were more predis- to see bitten calves (Fig. 1). When wild as kangaroos (Table 1), they infrequently posed to attacking calves than stable
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Sturt National Park
    Plan of Management Sturt National Park © 2018 State of NSW and the Office of Environment and Heritage With the exception of photographs, the State of NSW and the Office of Environment and Heritage (OEH) are pleased to allow this material to be reproduced in whole or in part for educational and non-commercial use, provided the meaning is unchanged and its source, publisher and authorship are acknowledged. Specific permission is required for the reproduction of photographs. OEH has compiled this publication in good faith, exercising all due care and attention. No representation is made about the accuracy, completeness or suitability of the information in this publication for any particular purpose. OEH shall not be liable for any damage that may occur to any person or organisation taking action or not on the basis of this publication. All content in this publication is owned by OEH and is protected by Crown Copyright. It is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) , subject to the exemptions contained in the licence. The legal code for the licence is available at Creative Commons . OEH asserts the right to be attributed as author of the original material in the following manner: © State of New South Wales and Office of Environment and Heritage 2018. This plan of management was adopted by the Minister for the Environment on 23 January 2018. Acknowledgments OEH acknowledges that Sturt is in the traditional Country of the Wangkumara and Malyangapa people. This plan of management was prepared by staff of the NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service (NPWS), part of OEH.
    [Show full text]
  • Biological Conservation 232 (2019) 187–193
    Biological Conservation 232 (2019) 187–193 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Biological Conservation journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/biocon A palaeontological perspective on the proposal to reintroduce Tasmanian devils to mainland Australia to suppress invasive predators T ⁎ Michael C. Westawaya, , Gilbert Priceb, Tony Miscamblec, Jane McDonaldb, Jonathon Crambb, ⁎ Jeremy Ringmad, Rainer Grüna, Darryl Jonesa, Mark Collarde, a Australian Research Centre for Human Evolution, Environmental Futures Research Institute, N13 Environment 2 Building, Griffith University, Nathan Campus, 170 Kessels Road, Nathan, Brisbane, Queensland 4111, Australia b School of Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of Queensland, St. Lucia, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia c School of Social Science, University of Queensland, St. Lucia, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia d College of Tropical Agriculture and Human Resources, University of Hawai‘i at Manoa, 2500 Campus Road, Honolulu, Hawai'i 96822, USA e Department of Archaeology, Simon Fraser University, 8888 University Drive, Burnaby, British Columbia V5A 1S6, Canada ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT Keywords: The diversity of Australia's mammalian fauna has decreased markedly since European colonisation. Species in Australia the small-to-medium body size range have been particularly badly affected. Feral cats and foxes have played a Invasive predator central role in this decline and consequently strategies for reducing their numbers are being evaluated. One such Fossil record strategy is the reintroduction to the mainland of the Tasmanian devil, Sarcophilus harrisii. Here, we provide a Feral cat palaeontological perspective on this proposal. We begin by collating published records of devil remains in Fox Quaternary deposits. These data show that the range of devils once spanned all the main ecological zones in Tasmanian devil Sarcophilus Australia.
    [Show full text]
  • Cost Effective Feral Animal Exclusion Fencing for Areas of High
    Cost Effective Feral Animal Exclusion Fencing for Areas of High Conservation Value in Australia Cost Effective Feral Animal Exclusion Fencing for Areas of High Conservation Value in Australia A report for the: Australian Government The Department of the Environment and Heritage Prepared by: Kirstin Long and Alan Robley Arthur Rylah Institute for Environmental Research Department of Sustainability and Environment Heidelberg, Melbourne July 2004 Cost Effective Feral Animal Exclusion Fencing for Areas of High Conservation Value in Australia by Long, K and Robley, A. The views and opinions expressed in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the Australian Government or the Minister for the Environment and Heritage. While reasonable efforts have been made to ensure that the contents of this publication are factually correct, the Commonwealth does not accept responsibility for the accuracy or completeness of the contents, and shall not be liable for any loss or damage that may be occasioned directly or indirectly through the use of, or reliance on, the contents of this publication. ISBN: 0642 549923 Published July 2004 © Commonwealth of Australia 2004 This work is copyright. Apart from any use as permitted under the Copyright Act 1968, no part may be reproduced by any process without prior written permission from the Commonwealth, available from the Department of the Environment and Heritage. Requests and inquiries concerning reproduction and rights should be addressed to: Director Threat Abatement
    [Show full text]
  • The Wily and Courageous Red Fox: Behavioural Analysis of a Mesopredator at Resource Points Shared by an Apex Predator
    animals Article The Wily and Courageous Red Fox: Behavioural Analysis of a Mesopredator at Resource Points Shared by an Apex Predator Eamonn Wooster *, Arian D. Wallach and Daniel Ramp Centre for Compassionate Conservation, University of Technology Sydney, P.O. Box 123, Ultimo, New South Wales 2007, Australia; [email protected] (A.D.W.); [email protected] (D.R.) * Correspondence: [email protected] Received: 21 September 2019; Accepted: 31 October 2019; Published: 4 November 2019 Simple Summary: The red fox is one of the Earth’s most widespread mammalian predators. Human globalisation has further expanded its range, so that today they are found on most continents. Despite their abundance, knowledge of fox behaviour remains limited. Most studies have observed foxes either in captivity or in their native range where both they and their predators are killed by humans. We conducted a behavioural study on foxes outside of their native range in Australia, at a unique location where all wildlife are protected. We developed an ethogram to explore fox behaviour at resource points shared with a potentially deadly apex predator, the dingo. We were surprised to find that foxes were in a confident state more often than in a cautious state, even leaving territorial markings over those of dingoes. One possible explanation for the confidence of foxes is that the social stability of both foxes and dingoes makes their world more predictable. Abstract: The red fox (Vulpes vulpes) is a widespread and ecologically significant terrestrial mesopredator, that has expanded its range with human globalisation. Despite this, we know relatively little about their behaviour under the wide range of ecological conditions they experience, particularly how they navigate the risk of encounters with apex predators.
    [Show full text]
  • Reintroducing the Dingo: the Risk of Dingo Predation to Threatened Vertebrates of Western New South Wales
    CSIRO PUBLISHING Wildlife Research http://dx.doi.org/10.1071/WR11128 Reintroducing the dingo: the risk of dingo predation to threatened vertebrates of western New South Wales B. L. Allen A,C and P. J. S. Fleming B AThe University of Queensland, School of Animal Studies, Gatton, Qld 4343, Australia. BVertebrate Pest Research Unit, NSW Department of Primary Industries, Orange Agricultural Institute, Forest Road, Orange, NSW 2800, Australia. CCorresponding author. Present address: Vertebrate Pest Research Unit, NSW Department of Primary Industries, Sulfide Street, Broken Hill, NSW 2880, Australia. Email: [email protected] Abstract Context. The reintroduction of dingoes into sheep-grazing areas south-east of the dingo barrier fence has been suggested as a mechanism to suppress fox and feral-cat impacts. Using the Western Division of New South Wales as a case study, Dickman et al. (2009) recently assessed the risk of fox and cat predation to extant threatened species and concluded that reintroducing dingoes into the area would have positive effects for most of the threatened vertebrates there, aiding their recovery through trophic cascade effects. However, they did not formally assess the risk of dingo predation to the same threatened species. Aims. To assess the risk of dingo predation to the extant and locally extinct threatened vertebrates of western New South Wales using methods amenable to comparison with Dickman et al. (2009). Methods. The predation-risk assessment method used in Dickman et al. (2009) for foxes and cats was applied here to dingoes, with minor modification to accommodate the dietary differences of dingoes. This method is based on six independent biological attributes, primarily reflective of potential vulnerability characteristics of the prey.
    [Show full text]
  • SHEEP, DINGOES and KANGAROOS: NEW CHALLENGES and a CHANGE of DIRECTION 20 YEARS on Peter Clark1, Elizabeth Clark1 and Benjamin L
    Citation: Clark P, Clark E, Allen BL (2018). Sheep, dingoes and kangaroos: new challenges and a change of direction 20 years on. In 'Advances in conservation through sustainable use of wildlife.' Eds G Baxter, N Finch, P Murray. pp. 173–178 (University of Queensland: Brisbane). Available online at: https://onlineshop.ssaa.org.au/product-category/publications/ SHEEP, DINGOES AND KANGAROOS: NEW CHALLENGES AND A CHANGE OF DIRECTION 20 YEARS ON Peter Clark1, Elizabeth Clark1 and Benjamin L. Allen2* 1Leander Station, Longreach, Queensland 4730, Australia. Email: [email protected] 2University of Southern Queensland, Institute for Agriculture and the Environment, Toowoomba, Queensland 4350. Email: [email protected] *Corresponding author. ABSTRACT Predation and competition are two primary forces limiting the extent to which sheep can be grazed in the Australian rangelands, particularly in Queensland. Dingo predation has been non-existent in much of the sheep zone since the localised eradication of dingoes in the early 1900s. Competition with kangaroos has been ever-present, but was previously managed (to some extent) by the commercial kangaroo harvesting industry. However, changes to dingo distribution and kangaroo densities and harvesting over the last 20 years have meant that dingo predation and kangaroo competition again threaten viable sheep production in the rangelands. Dingoes have increased their distribution and density in almost all sheep grazing areas and contemporary lethal control efforts are not preventing the decline of sheep. Loss of valuable international markets and moves to now harvest only adult male kangaroos means that the kangaroo harvesting industry produces little relief from kangaroo grazing pressure (given that kangaroo population growth is little affected by removal of adult males; see Finch et al.
    [Show full text]
  • Your Complete Guide to Broken Hill and The
    YOUR COMPLETE GUIDE TO DESTINATION BROKEN HILL Mundi Mundi Plains Broken Hill 2 City Map 4–7 Getting There and Around 8 HistoriC Lustre 10 Explore & Discover 14 Take a Walk... 20 Arts & Culture 28 Eat & Drink 36 Silverton Places to Stay 42 Shopping 48 Silverton prospects 50 Corner Country 54 The Outback & National Parks 58 Touring RoutEs 66 Regional Map 80 Broken Hill is on Australian Living Desert State Park Central Standard Time so make Line of Lode Miners Memorial sure you adjust your clocks to suit. « Have a safe and happy journey! Your feedback about this guide is encouraged. Every endeavour has been made to ensure that the details appearing in this publication are correct at the time of printing, but we can accept no responsibility for inaccuracies. Photography has been provided by Broken Hill City Council, Destination NSW, NSW National Parks & Wildlife Service, Simon Bayliss, The Nomad Company, Silverton Photography Gallery and other contributors. This visitor guide has been designed by Gang Gang Graphics and produced by Pace Advertising Pty. Ltd. ABN 44 005 361 768 Tel 03 5273 4777 W pace.com.au E [email protected] Copyright 2020 Destination Broken Hill. 1 Looking out from the Line Declared Australia’s first heritage-listed of Lode Miners Memorial city in 2015, its physical and natural charm is compelling, but you’ll soon discover what the locals have always known – that Broken Hill’s greatest asset is its people. Its isolation in a breathtakingly spectacular, rugged and harsh terrain means people who live here are resilient and have a robust sense of community – they embrace life, are self-sufficient and make things happen, but Broken Hill’s unique they’ve always got time for each other and if you’re from Welcome to out of town, it doesn’t take long to be embraced in the blend of Aboriginal and city’s characteristic old-world hospitality.
    [Show full text]
  • Detective Work Across Dingo Fence Reveals New Factor in Woody Shrub Invasion 5 December 2016
    Detective work across dingo fence reveals new factor in woody shrub invasion 5 December 2016 author UNSW Associate Professor Mike Letnic. "These weeds reduce the availability of feed for livestock and hinder access for mustering. But removing them is contentious, because they are classified as native vegetation." To measure the encroachment of woody shrubs into grasslands, the researchers, led by PhD candidate Christopher Gordon from Western Sydney University, examined aerial photographs of far western NSW and eastern South Australia spanning a 50 year period. A dusky hopping mouse which eats the seeds of woody shrubs in semi-arid Australia. Credit: Ben Moore Extermination of dingoes and the consequent loss of small mammals - not just overgrazing by livestock - have led to a rapid spread of woody shrubs across semi-arid Australia, a new study shows. Re-introduction of small mammals to desert areas could help prevent further invasion by the woody weeds, the researchers suggest. A dingo in semi-arid Australia. Extermination of dingoes The study in outback NSW compared conditions and consequent loss of small mammals have led to a on either side of the dingo fence - a two-metre tall, rapid spread of woody shrubs across semi-arid Australia. 5600-kilometre long fence erected more than a Credit: Ben Moore century ago to keep dingoes out of eastern Australia. Dingoes are common on the western side of the They assessed four sites in the Strzelecki Desert, fence, but rare on the other side, due to intensive two on either side of the dingo fence. The results control measures including poisoning, trapping and are published in the Journal of Animal Ecology.
    [Show full text]
  • The Wayward Dog: Is the Australian Native Dog Or Dingo a Distinct Species?
    Zootaxa 4317 (2): 201–224 ISSN 1175-5326 (print edition) http://www.mapress.com/j/zt/ Article ZOOTAXA Copyright © 2017 Magnolia Press ISSN 1175-5334 (online edition) https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.4317.2.1 http://zoobank.org/urn:lsid:zoobank.org:pub:3CD420BC-2AED-4166-85F9-CCA0E4403271 The Wayward Dog: Is the Australian native dog or Dingo a distinct species? STEPHEN M. JACKSON1,2,3,9, COLIN P. GROVES4, PETER J.S. FLEMING5,6, KEN P. APLIN3, MARK D.B. ELDRIDGE7, ANTONIO GONZALEZ4 & KRISTOFER M. HELGEN8 1Animal Biosecurity & Food Safety, NSW Department of Primary Industries, Orange, New South Wales 2800, Australia. 2School of Biological, Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW 2052. 3Division of Mammals, National Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, DC 20013-7012, USA. E-mail: [email protected] 4School of Archaeology & Anthropology, Australian National University, Canberra, ACT 0200, Australia. E: [email protected]; [email protected] 5Vertebrate Pest Research Unit, Biosecurity NSW, NSW Department of Primary Industries, Orange, New South Wales 2800, Australia. E-mail: [email protected] 6 School of Environmental & Rural Science, University of New England, Armidale, NSW 2351, Australia. 7Australian Museum Research Institute, Australian Museum, 1 William St. Sydney, NSW 2010, Australia. E-mail: [email protected] 8School of Biological Sciences, Environment Institute, and ARC (Australian Research Council) Centre for Australian Biodiversity and Heritage, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, SA 5005, Australia. E-mail: [email protected] 9Corresponding author. E-mail: [email protected] Abstract The taxonomic identity and status of the Australian Dingo has been unsettled and controversial since its initial description in 1792.
    [Show full text]
  • Food Chains, Food Webs, and Energy Pyramids Every Organism on Earth
    Energy to Live: Food Chains, Food Webs, and Energy Pyramids Every organism on Earth needs energy to live. Except for newly discovered species living in the deepest parts of the ocean, every species on Earth gets the energy they need to live from the sun. Food chains and food webs can both be used to show how energy moves from the sun to different animals. A food chain shows the path of energy through a chain of different organisms. The first link on a food chain is a producer. Producers include plants, bacteria, and algae. Plants are an important producer for humans. They use energy from the sun, water, and carbon dioxide in a process called photosynthesis to create energy. The plants use some of this energy to live and grow; the rest is stored for later use. The organism that eats the plant is called the primary consumer in the food chain. Both herbivores and omnivores eat plants. Herbivores only eat producers such as plants. Omnivores will eat both producers and other consumers (meat). The next link in the food chain is the secondary consumer. Secondary consumers are either carnivores or omnivores that eat the primary consumers. Carnivores only eat meat (other consumers). Another carnivore or omnivore will eat the secondary consumer. These are called tertiary consumers. There can be many links a food chain, but most food chains have a limited number of consumers. This is because a lot of energy is lost with every link of the chain. Each organism will use some of the energy it gets from eating, meaning that less energy is available to the next organism along the chain.
    [Show full text]
  • Red Foxes (Vulpes Vulpes) and Wild Dogs (Dingoes (Canis Lupus Dingo
    International Journal for Parasitology: Parasites and Wildlife 3 (2014) 75–80 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect International Journal for Parasitology: Parasites and Wildlife journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ijppaw Red foxes (Vulpes vulpes) and wild dogs (dingoes (Canis lupus dingo) and dingo/domestic dog hybrids), as sylvatic hosts for Australian Taenia hydatigena and Taenia ovis ⇑ David J. Jenkins a, , Nigel A.R. Urwin a, Thomas M. Williams a, Kate L. Mitchell a, Jan J. Lievaart a, Maria Teresa Armua-Fernandez b a School of Animal and Veterinary Sciences, Charles Sturt University, Locked Bag 588, Wagga Wagga, NSW 2678, Australia b Institute for Parasitology, Winterthurerstr 266a, University of Zürich, Zürich CH-8057, Switzerland article info abstract Article history: Foxes (n = 499), shot during vertebrate pest control programs, were collected in various sites in the Aus- Received 29 January 2014 tralian Capital Territory (ACT), New South Wales (NSW) and Western Australia (WA). Wild dogs (dingoes Revised 17 March 2014 (Canis lupus dingo) and their hybrids with domestic dogs) (n = 52) captured also as part of vertebrate pest Accepted 17 March 2014 control programs were collected from several sites in the ACT and NSW. The intestine from each fox and wild dog was collected, and all Taenia tapeworms identified morphologically were collected and identi- fied to species based on the DNA sequence of the small subunit of the mitochondrial ribosomal RNA (rrnS) Keywords: gene. Taenia species were recovered from 6.0% of the ACT/NSW foxes, 5.1% of WA foxes and 46.1% of ACT/ Taenia ovis NSW wild dogs. Taenia ovis was recovered from two foxes, 1/80 from Jugiong, NSW and 1/102 from T.
    [Show full text]
  • LARGE CANID (Canidae) CARE MANUAL
    LARGE CANID (Canidae) CARE MANUAL CREATED BY THE AZA Canid Taxon Advisory Group IN ASSOCIATION WITH THE AZA Animal Welfare Committee Large Canid (Canidae) Care Manual Large Canid (Canidae) Care Manual Published by the Association of Zoos and Aquariums in association with the AZA Animal Welfare Committee Formal Citation: AZA Canid TAG 2012. Large Canid (Canidae) Care Manual. Association of Zoos and Aquariums, Silver Spring, MD. p.138. Authors and Significant contributors: Melissa Rodden, Smithsonian Conservation Biology Institute, AZA Maned Wolf SSP Coordinator. Peter Siminski, The Living Desert, AZA Mexican Wolf SSP Coordinator. Will Waddell, Point Defiance Zoo and Aquarium, AZA Red Wolf SSP Coordinator. Michael Quick, Sedgwick County Zoo, AZA African Wild Dog SSP Coordinator. Reviewers: Melissa Rodden, Smithsonian Conservation Biology Institute, AZA Maned Wolf SSP Coordinator. Peter Siminski, The Living Desert, AZA Mexican Wolf SSP Coordinator. Will Waddell, Point Defiance Zoo and Aquarium, AZA Red Wolf SSP Coordinator. Michael Quick, Sedgwick County Zoo, AZA African Wild Dog SSP Coordinator. Mike Maslanka, Smithsonian’s National Zoo, AZA Nutrition Advisory Group Barbara Henry, Cincinnati Zoo & Botanical Garden, AZA Nutrition Advisory Group Raymond Van Der Meer, DierenPark Amersfoort, EAZA Canid TAG Chair. Dr. Michael B. Briggs, DVM, MS, African Predator Conservation Research Organization, CEO/Principle Investigator. AZA Staff Editors: Katie Zdilla, B.A. AZA Conservation and Science Intern Elisa Caballero, B.A. AZA Conservation and Science Intern Candice Dorsey, Ph.D. AZA Director, Animal Conservation Large Canid Care Manual project consultant: Joseph C.E. Barber, Ph.D. Cover Photo Credits: Brad McPhee, red wolf Bert Buxbaum, African wild dog and Mexican gray wolf Lisa Ware, maned wolf Disclaimer: This manual presents a compilation of knowledge provided by recognized animal experts based on the current science, practice, and technology of animal management.
    [Show full text]