The effects of population management on wild ungulates: A systematic map of evidence for UK species

Owain Barton, Amy Gresham, John R Healey, Line S Cordes and Graeme Shannon

PLOS ONE, 2022, vol. 17, issue 6, 1-26

Abstract: Introduction: Over recent decades, the abundance and geographic ranges of wild ungulate species have expanded in many parts of Europe, including the UK. Populations are managed to mitigate their ecological impacts using interventions, such as shooting, fencing and administering contraception. Predicting how target species will respond to interventions is critical for developing sustainable, effective and efficient management strategies. However, the quantity and quality of evidence of the effects of interventions on ungulate species is unclear. To address this, we systematically mapped research on the effects of population management on wild ungulate species resident in the UK. Methods: We searched four bibliographic databases, Google Scholar and nine organisational websites using search terms tested with a library of 30 relevant articles. Worldwide published peer-reviewed articles were considered, supplemented by ‘grey’ literature from UK-based sources. Three reviewers identified and screened articles for eligibility at title, abstract and full-text levels, based on predefined criteria. Data and metadata were extracted and summarised in a narrative synthesis supported by structured graphical matrices. Results: A total of 123 articles were included in the systematic map. Lethal interventions were better represented (85%, n = 105) than non-lethal interventions (25%, n = 25). Outcomes related to demography and behaviour were reported in 95% of articles (n = 117), whereas effects on health, physiology and morphology were studied in only 11% of articles (n = 14). Well-studied species included wild pigs (n = 58), red deer (n = 28) and roe deer (n = 23). Conclusions: Evidence for the effects of population management on wild ungulate species is growing but currently limited and unevenly distributed across intervention types, outcomes and species. Priorities for primary research include: species responses to non-lethal interventions, the side-effects of shooting and studies on sika deer and Chinese muntjac. Shooting is the only intervention for which sufficient evidence exists for systematic review or meta-analysis.

Date: 2022
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0267385 (text/html)
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id= ... 67385&type=printable (application/pdf)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:plo:pone00:0267385

DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0267385

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in PLOS ONE from Public Library of Science
Bibliographic data for series maintained by plosone ().