Action: Use negative stimuli to deter consumption of livestock feed by mammals to reduce human-wildlife conflict
Key messagesRead our guidance on Key messages before continuing
- One study evaluated the effects of using negative stimuli to deter consumption of livestock feed by mammals to reduce human-wildlife conflict. This study was in the USA.
KEY COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES)
POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES)
BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)
OTHER (1 STUDY)
- Human-wildlife conflict (1 study): A replicated, controlled study in the USA found that white-tailed deer presence at cattle feeders was usually reduced by a device that produced a negative stimulus.
Livestock feed might also attract wild herbivores. This could produce a financial cost to farmers, through added feed costs and through transmission of disease, such as bovine tuberculosis, between wild and domestic herbivores (Phillips et al. 2003). Disease transmission may be greater where animals share foodstuffs. Hence, if wild herbivores can be effectively deterred from accessing livestock feed, this may reduce motivations for carrying out lethal control of wild herbivores.
Phillips C.J., Foster C.R., Morris P.A. & Teverson R. (2003) The transmission of Mycobacterium bovis infection to cattle. Research in Veterinary Science, 74, 1–15.
Supporting evidence from individual studies
A replicated, controlled study in 2005 of captive deer on a farm in Michigan, USA (Seward et al. 2007) found that a deer-resistant cattle feeder device reduced white-tailed deer Odocoileus virginianus presence at feeders for the first five of six weeks. Fewer deer were recorded on camera traps within 1 m of feeders with active devices (0–0.2 deer/activation) than of feeders without devices (0.7–1.9 deer/activation) during the first five treatment weeks. There was no significant difference during the sixth week (active device: 0.4 deer/activation; no device: 1.2 deer/activation). During four weeks before device activation, deer number recorded on camera traps were similar between feeders with (2.3–2.9 deer/activation) and without (2.1–2.7 deer/activation) devices. Three feeders each were protected and unprotected by devices. Devices entailed a 3.4-m horizontal bar with a 1.6-m arm hanging on chains at each end, down to 45 cm above the ground. The rig rotated on a central pivot for 45 s, when an animal entered an infra-red-surveillance zone. Hanging arms struck animals within 1 m of feeders, startling, but not hurting, them. Monitoring, using camera traps, spanned 10 February to 10 March 2005 (devices inactive) and 13 May to 23 June 2005 (devices active).