Skip to main content

A Model for Evaluating Hunting and Contraception as Feral Hog Population Control Methods

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
  • 1343 Accesses

Part of the book series: Modeling Dynamic Systems ((MDS))

Abstract

Feral swine (Sus scrofa) are an invasive species known to feed on small animals, eggs, roots, and herbaceous material. In addition to being a nuisance on managed lands such as Fort Benning, GA, uncontrolled populations of feral swine destroy habitat and elevate the risk of disease for threatened and endangered species that cohabitate the land. This chapter explores the relative effectiveness of controlling feral swine populations with hunting, contraception, and a combination of the two. To study the issue, the authors used NetLogo (http://ccl.northwestern.edu/netlogo/) to develop an agent-based simulation model that incorporates digital maps of the subject population’s habitat at Fort Benning. Simulation results supported the hypothesis that the combination of lethal control and oral contraceptive delivery will provide better control of the Fort Benning feral swine population than will either technique alone. Additionally, the model provides a framework for understanding how feral swine interact with the landscape and helps land managers to predict the impacts of proposed control techniques.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    An operational copy of this model is available through http://extras.springer.com.

References

  • Adkins RN, Harveson LA (2006) Summer diets of feral hogs in the Davis Mountains, Texas. Southwest Nat 51(4):578–580

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Caley P (1997) Movements, activity patterns and habitat use of feral pigs (Sus scrofa) in a tropical habitat. Wildl Res 24:77–87

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Campbell TA, Lapidge SJ, Long DB (2006) Using baits to deliver pharmaceuticals to feral swine in southern Texas. Wildl Soc Bull 34(4):1184–1189

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Choquenot D, McIlroy J, Korn T (1996) Managing vertebrate pests: feral pigs. Bureau of resource sciences. Australian Government Publishing Service, Canberra

    Google Scholar 

  • Dzieciolowski RM, Clarke CMH, Frampton M (1992) Reproductive characteristics of wild pigs in New Zealand. Acta Theriologica 37:259–270

    Google Scholar 

  • Fleming PJS, Choquenot D, Mason RJ (2000) Aerial baiting of feral pigs (Sus scrofa) for the control of exotic disease in the semi-arid rangelands of New South Wales. Wildl Res 27(5):531–537

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Flowers WL (2001) Effect of age at which semen collection regimens are initiated on production of spermatozoa in boars. North Carolina State University, College of Agriculture and Life Sciences, Department of Animal Science Annual Swine Report 2001

    Google Scholar 

  • Graves HB (1984) Behavior and ecology of wild and feral swine (Sus scrofa). J Anim Sci 58(2):482–492

    Google Scholar 

  • Hanson LB (2006) Demography of feral pig populations at Fort Benning, Georgia. Auburn University, Auburn

    Google Scholar 

  • Hanson RP, Karstad L (1959) Feral swine in the southeastern United States. J Wildl Manage 23(1):64–74

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Herrero J, Garcia-Serrano A, Couto S, Ortuno VM, Garcia-Gonzalez R (2006) Diet of wild boar Sus scrofa L. and crop damage in an intensive agroecosystem. Eur J Wildl Res 52(4):245–250

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hirotani A, Nakatani J (1987) Grouping-patterns and inter-group relationships of Japanese wild boars (Sus scrofa leucomystax) in the Rokko mountain area. Ecol Res 2:77–84

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Honeyman MS, Roush WB (2002) The effects of outdoor farrowing hut type on prewean piglet mortality in Iowa. Am J Altern Agric 17(2):92–95

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jolley DB (2007) Reproduction and herpetofauna depredation of feral pigs at Fort Benning, Georgia. Auburn University, Auburn

    Google Scholar 

  • Kavanaugh DM, Linhart SB (2000) A modified bait for oral delivery of biological agents to raccoons and feral swine. J Wildl Dis 36(1):86–91

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kurz JC, Marchint RI (1972) Radiotelemetry studies of feral hogs in South Carolina. J Wildl Manage 36(4):1240–1248

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Matschke GH (1964) The influence of oak mast on European wild hog reproduction. In: Proceedings Annual Conference Southeast Association of Game and Fish Commission, vol 18. pp 35–39

    Google Scholar 

  • Mauget R (1991) Reproductive biology of the wild Suidae. In: Barrett RH, Spitz F (eds) Biology of Suidae. IRGM, Toulouse, pp 49–64

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell J (1998) The effectiveness of aerial baiting for control of feral pigs (Sus scrofa) in north Queensland. Wildl Res 25(3):297–303

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pedersen LJ (2007) Sexual behaviour in female pigs. Horm Behav 52(1):64–69

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Saunders G, McLeod S (1999) Predicting home range size from the body mass or population densities of feral pigs, Sus scrofa (Artiodactyla: Suidae). Aust J Ecol 24:538–543

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taylor RB (1991) The feral hog in Texas. In: Federal Aid Report Series Number 28. Texas Parks and Wildlife Department, Austin

    Google Scholar 

  • Twigg LE, Lowe T, Martin G (2007) Bait consumption by, and 1080-based control of, feral pigs in the Mediterranean climatic region of south-western Australia. Wildl Res 34(2):125–139

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilensky U (1999) NetLogo. Computer software. Center for Connected Learning and Computer-Based Modeling, Northwestern University, Evanston. http://ccl.northwestern.edu/netlogo/

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jennifer L. Burton .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2012 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Burton, J.L. et al. (2012). A Model for Evaluating Hunting and Contraception as Feral Hog Population Control Methods. In: Westervelt, J., Cohen, G. (eds) Ecologist-Developed Spatially-Explicit Dynamic Landscape Models. Modeling Dynamic Systems. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-1257-1_8

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics