An assessment of the published results of animal relocations

An assessment of the published results of animal relocations We reviewed 180 case studies and a number of theoretical papers on animal relocations published in 12 major international scientific journals over the last 20 years. The study focused on re-introductions, supplementations and translocations (sensu IUCN, 1996. IUCN/SSC Guidelines for Re-introductions. 41st Meeting of the IUCN Council, Gland, Switzerland, May 1995. Http://iucn.org/themes/ssc/pubs/policy/hinte.htm.). We did not assess introductions. Re-introductions were the most common type of relocation (116/180); three quarters of these were conducted for conservation purposes. Supplementations (48/180) and translocations (36/180) occurred less frequently, and both were commonly carried out for reasons other than conservation. Simple descriptive statistics were used to analyse factors influencing relocation success. Translocations that aimed to solve human–animal conflicts generally failed. Re-introduction success was not found to have changed over the last two decades, but re-introductions appeared to be more successful when the source population was wild, a large number of animals was released ( n >100), and the cause of original decline was removed. More complex trends were found for the effect of predation and the use of supportive measures such as provision of food or shelter, or predator control prior to release. The success of 47% of re-introductions was uncertain at the time case studies were published in journals. This was partly due to the lack of generally accepted and widely applied criteria to assess success. Very few case studies (3%) reported the cost of the relocation attempt. We conclude that there were three primary aims for animal relocations. These were to solve human–animal conflicts, to restock game populations, and conservation. Our extensive review of the present literature leads us to conclude that the value of animal relocations as a conservation tool could be enhanced through (1) more rigorous testing for the appropriateness of the approach in a given case, (2) the establishment of widely used and generally accepted criteria for judging the success or failure of relocations, (3) better monitoring after a relocation, (4) better financial accountability, and (5) greater effort to publish the results of relocations, even ones that are unsuccessful. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Biological Conservation Elsevier

An assessment of the published results of animal relocations

Loading next page...
1
 
/lp/elsevier/an-assessment-of-the-published-results-of-animal-relocations-0l517Usv1X
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

We reviewed 180 case studies and a number of theoretical papers on animal relocations published in 12 major international scientific journals over the last 20 years. The study focused on re-introductions, supplementations and translocations (sensu IUCN, 1996. IUCN/SSC Guidelines for Re-introductions. 41st Meeting of the IUCN Council, Gland, Switzerland, May 1995. Http://iucn.org/themes/ssc/pubs/policy/hinte.htm.). We did not assess introductions. Re-introductions were the most common type of relocation (116/180); three quarters of these were conducted for conservation purposes. Supplementations (48/180) and translocations (36/180) occurred less frequently, and both were commonly carried out for reasons other than conservation. Simple descriptive statistics were used to analyse factors influencing relocation success. Translocations that aimed to solve human–animal conflicts generally failed. Re-introduction success was not found to have changed over the last two decades, but re-introductions appeared to be more successful when the source population was wild, a large number of animals was released ( n >100), and the cause of original decline was removed. More complex trends were found for the effect of predation and the use of supportive measures such as provision of food or shelter, or predator control prior to release. The success of 47% of re-introductions was uncertain at the time case studies were published in journals. This was partly due to the lack of generally accepted and widely applied criteria to assess success. Very few case studies (3%) reported the cost of the relocation attempt. We conclude that there were three primary aims for animal relocations. These were to solve human–animal conflicts, to restock game populations, and conservation. Our extensive review of the present literature leads us to conclude that the value of animal relocations as a conservation tool could be enhanced through (1) more rigorous testing for the appropriateness of the approach in a given case, (2) the establishment of widely used and generally accepted criteria for judging the success or failure of relocations, (3) better monitoring after a relocation, (4) better financial accountability, and (5) greater effort to publish the results of relocations, even ones that are unsuccessful.

Journal

Biological ConservationElsevier

Published: Nov 1, 2000

References

You’re reading a free preview. Subscribe to read the entire article.


DeepDyve is your
personal research library

It’s your single place to instantly
discover and read the research
that matters to you.

Enjoy affordable access to
over 18 million articles from more than
15,000 peer-reviewed journals.

All for just $49/month

Explore the DeepDyve Library

Search

Query the DeepDyve database, plus search all of PubMed and Google Scholar seamlessly

Organize

Save any article or search result from DeepDyve, PubMed, and Google Scholar... all in one place.

Access

Get unlimited, online access to over 18 million full-text articles from more than 15,000 scientific journals.

Your journals are on DeepDyve

Read from thousands of the leading scholarly journals from SpringerNature, Elsevier, Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford University Press and more.

All the latest content is available, no embargo periods.

See the journals in your area

DeepDyve

Freelancer

DeepDyve

Pro

Price

FREE

$49/month
$360/year

Save searches from
Google Scholar,
PubMed

Create folders to
organize your research

Export folders, citations

Read DeepDyve articles

Abstract access only

Unlimited access to over
18 million full-text articles

Print

20 pages / month

PDF Discount

20% off