Evaluation and cost-benefits of controlling house mice (Mus domesticus) on islands: an example from Thevenard Island, Western Australia

Published source details Moro D. (2001) Evaluation and cost-benefits of controlling house mice (Mus domesticus) on islands: an example from Thevenard Island, Western Australia. Biological Conservation, 99, 355-364.
Share Tweet Email

This study is summarised as evidence for the following.

	Action	Category
	Remove/control non-native mammals Action Link

Remove/control non-native mammals

A replicated, controlled, before-and-after study in 1999 at six shrub and grassland sites on an island in Western Australia, Australia (Moro 2001) found that baiting to control invasive house mice Mus domesticus increased the density of short-tailed mice Leggadina lakedownensis in one out of four comparisons. Twenty-two days after baiting, the minimum abundance of short-tailed mice was higher in one site with bait deployed every 10 m than before baiting (12.7 vs 7.0 mice). Short-tailed mouse numbers were low in all other sites (baited and unbaited) and were similar after baiting compared to before (see original paper for details). House mice numbers declined on all baited sites (pre-baiting: 5.8-6.2 mice/ha; post baiting: 2.5-2.7 mice/ha). Six grids were established in individual sites at least 1 km apart in May 1999. Two sites were baited with ‘Talon’ (15-g wax blocks containing 0.005% brodifacoum) at 10 m intervals (117 bait stations/grid), two were baited at 20 m intervals (45 bait stations/grid) and two were unbaited. Bait was replenished every two days for seven days and then again on the fourteenth day. Each site had 25 trap stations arranged in a 5 x 5 pattern, each with one pitfall trap and associated 5 m drift-fencing and one Elliott trap. Sites were monitored for two nights before baiting and up to 22 nights after baiting.

(Summarised by: Ricardo Rocha)