Conclusion There is no overall optimal strategy for the bait distribution in large areas.
The management result with the proper strategy is likely the same but with reduced costs. The reference strategy's bait density can be reduced when accounting for the missed fox groups. However, reducing the flight line distance provides a more even bait distribution and thus compensates for missed fox groups or extra high fox density. Increasing the bait density on the same flight-line pattern neither reduces the number of under- baited fox group home-ranges, nor improves the management outcome and hence wastes resources. 10% of all fox groups without any bait (at most 5 baits relate to the baiting strategy applied in the field (1 km spaced parallel flight lines, 20 baits per km2 distributed under habitat conditions comparable to middle and western Europe (fox group home-range 1 km2, 2.5 adults reference strategy. The comparison enables the rating of the options with respect to the management aim (i.e.
The manager's strategic options are converted into changes of the resulting bait distribution on the ground. The number of baits actually falling into each polygon is measured. Methods We use a spatial simulation, which combines explicitly fox space use (tessellation polygons and aeroplane flight lines (straight lines. The 'Increase bait density' option refers to the usual management assumption that more baits per km2 could compensate for high fox abundance and override the imperfect supply of bait pieces to the individual fox. Eastern Europe and the Americas forces cost-benefit discussions. The future need to control the disease in large countries (i.e. Oral mass vaccination has developed into the most effective management method to control fox rabies. Assessing anti-rabies baiting – what happens on the ground?ĭirectory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)įull Text Available Abstract Background Rabies is one of the most hazardous zoonoses in the world.
0 kommentar(er)
