Migration of feral pigs (Sus scrofa) in rainforests of north Queensland: fact or fiction?

The Wet Tropics bioregion of north Queensland has been identified as an area of global significance. The world-heritage-listed rainforests have been invaded by feral pigs (Sus scrofa) that are perceived to cause substantial environmental damage. A community perception exists of an annual altitudinal migration of the feral-pig population. The present study describes the movements of 29 feral pigs in relation to altitudinal migration (highland, transitional and lowland areas). Feral pigs were sedentary and stayed within their home range throughout a 4-year study period. No altitudinal migration was detected; pigs moved no more than a mean distance of 1.0 km from the centre of their calculated home ranges. There was no significant difference between the mean (+/- 95% confidence interval) aggregate home ranges for males (8.7 +/- 4.3 km², n = 15) and females (7.2 +/- 1.8 km², n = 14). No difference in home range was detected among the three altitudinal areas: 7.2 +/- 2.4 km² for highland, 6.2 +/- 3.9 km² for transitional and 9.9 +/- 5.3 km² for lowland areas. The aggregate mean home range for all pigs in the present study was 8.0 +/- 2.4 km². The study also assessed the influence seasons had on the home range of eight feral pigs on the rainforest boundary; home ranges did not significantly vary in size between the tropical wet and dry seasons, although the mean home range in the dry season (7.7 +/- 6.9 km²) was more than twice the home range in the wet season (2.9 +/- 0.8 km²). Heavier pigs tended to have larger home ranges. The results of the present study suggest that feral pigs are sedentary throughout the year so broad-scale control techniques need to be applied over sufficient areas to encompass individual home ranges. Control strategies need a coordinated approach if a long-term reduction in the pig population is to be achieved.

Increased reproductive success in older female red kangaroos and the impact of harvesting

Wildlife harvesting has a long history in Australia, including obvious examples of overexploitation. Not surprisingly, there is scepticism that commercial harvesting can be undertaken sustainably. Kangaroo harvesting has been challenged regularly at Administrative Appeals Tribunals and elsewhere over the past three decades. Initially, the concern from conservation groups was sustainability of the harvest. This has been addressed through regular, direct monitoring that now spans > 30 years and a conservative harvest regime with a low risk of overharvest in the face of uncertainty. Opposition to the harvest now continues from animal rights groups whose concerns have shifted from overall harvest sustainability to side effects such as animal welfare, and changes to community structure, genetic composition and population age structure. Many of these concerns are speculative and difficult to address, requiring expensive data. One concern is that older females are the more successful breeders and teach their daughters optimal habitat and diet selection. The lack of older animals in a harvested population may reduce the fitness of the remaining individuals; implying population viability would also be compromised. This argument can be countered by the persistence of populations under harvesting without any obvious impairment to reproduction. Nevertheless, an interesting question is how age influences reproductive output. In this study, data collected from a number of red kangaroo populations across eastern Australia indicate that the breeding success of older females is up to 7-20% higher than that of younger females. This effect is smaller than that of body condition and the environment, which can increase breeding success by up to 30% and 60% respectively. Average age of mature females in a population may be reduced from 9 to 6 years old, resulting in a potential reduction in breeding success of 3-4%. This appears to be offset in harvested populations by improved condition of females from a reduction in kangaroo density. There is an important recommendation for management. The best insurance policy against overharvest and unwanted side effects is not research, which could be never-ending. Rather, it is a harvest strategy that includes safeguards against uncertainty such as harvest reserves, conservative quotas and regular monitoring. Research is still important in fine tuning that strategy and is most usefully incorporated as adaptive management where it can address the key questions on how populations respond to harvesting.