An evaluation of three restraining devices for capturing pampas foxes

LUENGOS VIDAL, E.M.; LUCHERINI M.,; CASANAVE E.B.

Canid News

Oxford University?s, IUCN/SSC Canid Specialist Group

Lugar: Oxford; Año: 2003 vol. 6 p. 1 - 9

1478-2677

Restraining is essential to many wildlife re­search and management programs. In an Ar­gentine Pampas area, we studied the trapping success for the pampas fox Pseudalapex gym­nocercus. We compared the capture efficiency (captures/trap days), species selectivity (fox captures/ all captures), trap reliability (fox cap­tures/ fox visits), and malfunction rate (dis­turbed traps/trap days, of three restraining devices with different baits. In 3,495 trap days, we made 60 captures of 34 foxes and 13 other camivores. Trapping rate differed from ex­pected based on trapping effort, but efficiency varied little between traps, particularly be­tween neck snares a...´1d foot-hold traps, while box traps proved less effective. Neck snares were the most selective devices, while live­baited foot-hold traps were the most reliable trap/bait combinations. The lowest rate of malfunction was provided by the box trap/live bait combination. We suggest that bait type should be accounted for when evaluating h´ap performance. Restraining is essential to many wildlife re­search and management programs. In an Ar­gentine Pampas area, we studied the trapping success for the pampas fox Pseudalapex gym­nocercus. We compared the capture efficiency (captures/trap days), species selectivity (fox captures/ all captures), trap reliability (fox cap­tures/ fox visits), and malfunction rate (dis­turbed traps/trap days, of three restraining devices with different baits. In 3,495 trap days, we made 60 captures of 34 foxes and 13 other camivores. Trapping rate differed from ex­pected based on trapping effort, but efficiency varied little between traps, particularly be­tween neck snares a...´1d foot-hold traps, while box traps proved less effective. Neck snares were the most selective devices, while live­baited foot-hold traps were the most reliable trap/bait combinations. The lowest rate of malfunction was provided by the box trap/live bait combination. We suggest that bait type should be accounted for when evaluating h´ap performance.