To Feed or not to Feed? Evidence of the Intended and Unintended Effects of Feeding Wild Ungulates

Ungulate populations are important natural resources, associated with both costs and benefits. Conflicts have arisen between stakeholders who benefit from high ungulate numbers and those faced with the costs. Supplementary or diversionary feeding may potentially mitigate conflicts while maintaining...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Published in:The Journal of Wildlife Management
Main Authors: Milner, Jos M., van Beest, Floris, Schmidt, Karoline T., Brook, Ryan K., Storaas, Torstein
Format: Article in Journal/Newspaper
Language:English
Published: 2014
Subjects:
artificial feeding
deer
forest damage
habitat impact
herbivore
hunting
supplemental feed
sustainable management
vehicle collision
wildlife disease
WHITE-TAILED DEER
MOOSE ALCES-ALCES
BOAR SUS-SCROFA
EMERGING INFECTIOUS-DISEASES
CHRONIC WASTING DISEASE
JACKSON ELK HERD
RED DEER
CERVUS-ELAPHUS
ODOCOILEUS-VIRGINIANUS
Alces alces
Online Access:https://pure.au.dk/portal/en/publications/e2b20582-13fd-4634-9494-f340cd88efbb
https://doi.org/10.1002/jwmg.798
https://pure.au.dk/ws/files/84424877/Milner_et_al_2014_JWM_To_feed_or_not_to_feed.pdf
Description
Summary:Ungulate populations are important natural resources, associated with both costs and benefits. Conflicts have arisen between stakeholders who benefit from high ungulate numbers and those faced with the costs. Supplementary or diversionary feeding may potentially mitigate conflicts while maintaining harvest yields but can have conservation implications. We quantified the empirical evidence for whether the intended effects, and hence management goals, of feeding are met. We also examined whether any potential unintended consequences of feeding occur and under what conditions. We found clear evidence that supplementary feeding enhanced reproduction and population growth under certain conditions. By contrast, we found limited evidence of the effectiveness of diversionary feeding to protect crops, forestry, and natural habitats, with positive effects often undermined by increases in ungulate density. However, the use of diversionary feeding to reduce traffic collisions seems promising but requires further investigation. The unintended effects of feeding are typically complex, involving changes to demography, behavior, and vegetation with consequent cascading effects on other trophic levels, as well as exacerbated risks of disease transmission. Increased ungulate density is the primary driver behind these unintended effects, the consequences of which tend to increase with longevity of feeding and affect a range of stakeholders. We urge managers to take seriously the risks as well as the economic and ethical issues before deciding to feed ungulates. (c) 2014 The Wildlife Society.

Similar Items