Modelling the costs of fox predation and preventive measures on sheep farms in Britain.

Economic analysis is a useful tool to aid decisions on what to do about wildlife impacts, such as those of vertebrate predators on livestock farmers. The case-study of lamb predation by foxes in Britain is used to develop a theoretical economic model, with the aim of determining a financially optimal solution to minimise the total costs of livestock predation at the farm-level. Total costs include output losses and expenditure on preventive and control measures, in this case indoor housing and lethal fox control. The model is tested empirically with data from a questionnaire survey of sheep farmers and field data on fox population densities in Britain. Regression analyses are used to determine the relationships between lamb losses and expenditure on indoor housing, fox population density and other non-management characteristics. The effect of fox abundance on the cost of fox control is also assessed. Marginal analysis is used to determine the total cost-minimising solution from the farmer's point-of-view, in terms of how many ewes should be housed indoors and for how long, as well as how many foxes should be killed in addition to any lethal control already carried out. Optimal solutions vary according to farm characteristics, including flock size and the regional location of farms. In all cases, to minimise the costs of predation, as many ewes as possible should be housed. However, it is not worthwhile housing them for more than a day after lambing. Efficient fox predation management does not necessarily mean that lamb losses should be reduced to zero, and additional fox control is not worthwhile on the majority of farms. The analysis provides a framework for future evaluations of wildlife impacts and cost-effective management of these problems.

The current and future management of wild mammals hunted with dogs in England and Wales.

There is increasing concern about the use of lethal methods to control wild mammal populations, especially those methods that may have significant impacts on animal welfare. The continued use of dogs to hunt wild mammals in England and Wales, principally foxes (Vulpes vulpes), red deer (Cervus elaphus), brown hares (Lepus europaeus) and mink (Mustela vison), has become a focus for political debate and has been the subject of a recent UK government inquiry. This paper reports the results of a questionnaire study to quantify the use, effectiveness and acceptability of the different methods currently used to manage these four species, and future changes in management following a possible ban on hunting with dogs. There was no straightforward relationship between culling pressure and perceived pest status of the different species from the questionnaire data. For foxes and brown hares, the proportion of land managers (practitioners) carrying out lethal control was higher than that considering these species to be pests. However, the reverse was the case for mink. The most frequently used and effective control methods, which were most acceptable to practitioners and public alike, were various forms of shooting. The general public perceived hunting with dogs as one of the least acceptable means of control for all four species. Practitioners thought that hunting with dogs for red deer and the use of terriers against foxes were among the least acceptable forms of control, but considered hunting with dogs in other situations and for other species to be relatively acceptable. Most practitioners said a ban on hunting with dogs would make no difference to their management of the four species. A ban on hunting with dogs would have minimal impact on populations of foxes, red deer and mink, but it may be of conservation benefit to hares.