Consequences of game bird management for non‐game species in Europe

Karen Mustin (Corresponding Author), Beatriz Arroyo, Pedro Beja, Scott Newey, R. Justin Irivine, Julia Kestler, Steve M. Redpath

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

3 Citations (Scopus)
5 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

1.Game bird management has the potential to benefit conservation, as management practices specifically targeted at reducing the factors limiting game populations may have positive effects on non-game species. However, such management may also have costs to species. 2.We review the literature that examines the effect of different forms of game bird management on non-target species in Europe, including habitat management, predator control, parasite control, provision of water and food, and rear and release. We focus on Europe, where these forms of management are common and sometimes intensive. 3.We identified 35 studies, which recorded 122 individual significant effects. Most studies (80%) focussed on the effects of habitat management and predator control, and >90% were carried out in the UK. 4.63% of the 122 significant effects on non-game species were positive. Overall, 85% of the effects of habitat management in agricultural habitats were positive, while in non-agricultural habitats 65% of effects were negative. Effects of rear and release were mixed (8 positive and 7 negative). Legal predator control was almost always positive (96% of effects), or benign, whereas illegal predator control was always negative (8 effects). This continues to be a major cost to conservation. No studies examined the effects of parasite control on non-target wildlife. Three of four significant effects of supplementary feeding were negative. 5.More studies are needed on the impacts of game bird management on non-game species, and particularly of rear and release, the provision of supplementary food and water, and parasite control. We also found few experimental studies examining the specific effects of management for shooting of game birds, and very few studies overall outside the UK. Future studies should aim to fill these gaps. 6.Synthesis and applications. The management of game bird populations for shooting is widespread across Europe. Our study shows that effects of such management practices vary between different non-target species. There is a need to understand these trade-offs, find effective strategies to limit the damaging aspects of game bird management, and work to enhance the benefits for the conservation of biodiversity. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)2285-2295
Number of pages11
JournalJournal of Applied Ecology
Volume55
Issue number5
Early online date12 Mar 2018
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Sep 2018

Fingerprint

bird
predator control
parasite control
habitat management
Europe
effect
management practice
food
habitat
cost
limiting factor
experimental study
biodiversity
water

Keywords

  • hunting
  • uplands
  • biodiversity conservation
  • predator control
  • rear and release
  • habitat management
  • parasite control
  • supplementary feed
  • game bird management

Cite this

Mustin, K., Arroyo, B., Beja, P., Newey, S., Irivine, R. J., Kestler, J., & Redpath, S. M. (2018). Consequences of game bird management for non‐game species in Europe. Journal of Applied Ecology, 55(5), 2285-2295. https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2664.13131

Consequences of game bird management for non‐game species in Europe. / Mustin, Karen (Corresponding Author); Arroyo, Beatriz; Beja, Pedro; Newey, Scott; Irivine, R. Justin; Kestler, Julia; Redpath, Steve M.

In: Journal of Applied Ecology, Vol. 55, No. 5, 09.2018, p. 2285-2295.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Mustin, K, Arroyo, B, Beja, P, Newey, S, Irivine, RJ, Kestler, J & Redpath, SM 2018, 'Consequences of game bird management for non‐game species in Europe', Journal of Applied Ecology, vol. 55, no. 5, pp. 2285-2295. https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2664.13131
Mustin K, Arroyo B, Beja P, Newey S, Irivine RJ, Kestler J et al. Consequences of game bird management for non‐game species in Europe. Journal of Applied Ecology. 2018 Sep;55(5):2285-2295. https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2664.13131
Mustin, Karen ; Arroyo, Beatriz ; Beja, Pedro ; Newey, Scott ; Irivine, R. Justin ; Kestler, Julia ; Redpath, Steve M. / Consequences of game bird management for non‐game species in Europe. In: Journal of Applied Ecology. 2018 ; Vol. 55, No. 5. pp. 2285-2295.
@article{c135f09cf36147d4ab352821a16b6ccf,
title = "Consequences of game bird management for non‐game species in Europe",
abstract = "1.Game bird management has the potential to benefit conservation, as management practices specifically targeted at reducing the factors limiting game populations may have positive effects on non-game species. However, such management may also have costs to species. 2.We review the literature that examines the effect of different forms of game bird management on non-target species in Europe, including habitat management, predator control, parasite control, provision of water and food, and rear and release. We focus on Europe, where these forms of management are common and sometimes intensive. 3.We identified 35 studies, which recorded 122 individual significant effects. Most studies (80{\%}) focussed on the effects of habitat management and predator control, and >90{\%} were carried out in the UK. 4.63{\%} of the 122 significant effects on non-game species were positive. Overall, 85{\%} of the effects of habitat management in agricultural habitats were positive, while in non-agricultural habitats 65{\%} of effects were negative. Effects of rear and release were mixed (8 positive and 7 negative). Legal predator control was almost always positive (96{\%} of effects), or benign, whereas illegal predator control was always negative (8 effects). This continues to be a major cost to conservation. No studies examined the effects of parasite control on non-target wildlife. Three of four significant effects of supplementary feeding were negative. 5.More studies are needed on the impacts of game bird management on non-game species, and particularly of rear and release, the provision of supplementary food and water, and parasite control. We also found few experimental studies examining the specific effects of management for shooting of game birds, and very few studies overall outside the UK. Future studies should aim to fill these gaps. 6.Synthesis and applications. The management of game bird populations for shooting is widespread across Europe. Our study shows that effects of such management practices vary between different non-target species. There is a need to understand these trade-offs, find effective strategies to limit the damaging aspects of game bird management, and work to enhance the benefits for the conservation of biodiversity. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.",
keywords = "hunting, uplands, biodiversity conservation, predator control, rear and release, habitat management, parasite control, supplementary feed, game bird management",
author = "Karen Mustin and Beatriz Arroyo and Pedro Beja and Scott Newey and Irivine, {R. Justin} and Julia Kestler and Redpath, {Steve M.}",
year = "2018",
month = "9",
doi = "10.1111/1365-2664.13131",
language = "English",
volume = "55",
pages = "2285--2295",
journal = "Journal of Applied Ecology",
issn = "0021-8901",
publisher = "Wiley",
number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Consequences of game bird management for non‐game species in Europe

AU - Mustin, Karen

AU - Arroyo, Beatriz

AU - Beja, Pedro

AU - Newey, Scott

AU - Irivine, R. Justin

AU - Kestler, Julia

AU - Redpath, Steve M.

PY - 2018/9

Y1 - 2018/9

N2 - 1.Game bird management has the potential to benefit conservation, as management practices specifically targeted at reducing the factors limiting game populations may have positive effects on non-game species. However, such management may also have costs to species. 2.We review the literature that examines the effect of different forms of game bird management on non-target species in Europe, including habitat management, predator control, parasite control, provision of water and food, and rear and release. We focus on Europe, where these forms of management are common and sometimes intensive. 3.We identified 35 studies, which recorded 122 individual significant effects. Most studies (80%) focussed on the effects of habitat management and predator control, and >90% were carried out in the UK. 4.63% of the 122 significant effects on non-game species were positive. Overall, 85% of the effects of habitat management in agricultural habitats were positive, while in non-agricultural habitats 65% of effects were negative. Effects of rear and release were mixed (8 positive and 7 negative). Legal predator control was almost always positive (96% of effects), or benign, whereas illegal predator control was always negative (8 effects). This continues to be a major cost to conservation. No studies examined the effects of parasite control on non-target wildlife. Three of four significant effects of supplementary feeding were negative. 5.More studies are needed on the impacts of game bird management on non-game species, and particularly of rear and release, the provision of supplementary food and water, and parasite control. We also found few experimental studies examining the specific effects of management for shooting of game birds, and very few studies overall outside the UK. Future studies should aim to fill these gaps. 6.Synthesis and applications. The management of game bird populations for shooting is widespread across Europe. Our study shows that effects of such management practices vary between different non-target species. There is a need to understand these trade-offs, find effective strategies to limit the damaging aspects of game bird management, and work to enhance the benefits for the conservation of biodiversity. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

AB - 1.Game bird management has the potential to benefit conservation, as management practices specifically targeted at reducing the factors limiting game populations may have positive effects on non-game species. However, such management may also have costs to species. 2.We review the literature that examines the effect of different forms of game bird management on non-target species in Europe, including habitat management, predator control, parasite control, provision of water and food, and rear and release. We focus on Europe, where these forms of management are common and sometimes intensive. 3.We identified 35 studies, which recorded 122 individual significant effects. Most studies (80%) focussed on the effects of habitat management and predator control, and >90% were carried out in the UK. 4.63% of the 122 significant effects on non-game species were positive. Overall, 85% of the effects of habitat management in agricultural habitats were positive, while in non-agricultural habitats 65% of effects were negative. Effects of rear and release were mixed (8 positive and 7 negative). Legal predator control was almost always positive (96% of effects), or benign, whereas illegal predator control was always negative (8 effects). This continues to be a major cost to conservation. No studies examined the effects of parasite control on non-target wildlife. Three of four significant effects of supplementary feeding were negative. 5.More studies are needed on the impacts of game bird management on non-game species, and particularly of rear and release, the provision of supplementary food and water, and parasite control. We also found few experimental studies examining the specific effects of management for shooting of game birds, and very few studies overall outside the UK. Future studies should aim to fill these gaps. 6.Synthesis and applications. The management of game bird populations for shooting is widespread across Europe. Our study shows that effects of such management practices vary between different non-target species. There is a need to understand these trade-offs, find effective strategies to limit the damaging aspects of game bird management, and work to enhance the benefits for the conservation of biodiversity. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

KW - hunting

KW - uplands

KW - biodiversity conservation

KW - predator control

KW - rear and release

KW - habitat management

KW - parasite control

KW - supplementary feed

KW - game bird management

U2 - 10.1111/1365-2664.13131

DO - 10.1111/1365-2664.13131

M3 - Article

VL - 55

SP - 2285

EP - 2295

JO - Journal of Applied Ecology

JF - Journal of Applied Ecology

SN - 0021-8901

IS - 5

ER -