7 (more) kiwis dead by dogs

Dog attacks kill 7 kiwi in Kerikeri

Fatal Northland dog attacks on kiwi have left seven birds dead over the last two months. (continue reading on http://www.stuff.co.nz/)

Dog predation and disturbance on wildlife

Holderness-Roddam, B., & McQuillan, P. B. (2014). Domestic dogs (Canis familiaris) as a predator and disturbance agent of wildlife in Tasmania.Australasian Journal of Environmental Management, (ahead-of-print), 1-12.

Domestic dogs are potentially a threat to the wellbeing of Tasmania's native wildlife in urban reserves, possibly comparable to cats. Dogs disrupt feeding and breeding in wildlife. Greater Hobart has 33,000 registered domestic dogs, concentrated in the more densely populated areas. Datasets of the Resource Management and Conservation Division of the Tasmanian Department of Primary Industries, and the Australian Wildlife Health Centre, Wildlife Hospital at Healesville Sanctuary, Victoria, were used to compare the effects of dogs as predators with cats. These datasets indicated that dogs were responsible for more reported attacks on wildlife than cats. These findings have management implications for local councils, who are typically responsible for such areas. They need to review the urban natural areas where dogs are permitted, both on leash and off leash, and then consider monitoring dog owner behaviour at peak dog walking periods – in evenings and at weekends – and prosecute non-compliant dog owners. At the planning stage for new subdivisions, particularly those near sensitive wildlife areas, councils should consider mandating bushland reserves with larger buffer zones to reduce the effects of residential development.

People and dogs disturbing birds on the beach

Lafferty, K. D. (2001). Birds at a Southern California beach: seasonality, habitat use and disturbance by human activity. Biodiversity & Conservation, 10(11), 1949-1962.

Use of a Santa Barbara beach by people and birds varied in both time and space. There were 100 birds, 18 people and 2 dogs per kilometer. Bird density varied primarily with the season and tide while human activity varied most between weekend and weekday. Bird distributions along the beach were determined mainly by habitat type (particularly a lagoon and exposed rocky intertidal areas) For crows and western gulls, there was some evidence that access to urban refuse increased abundance. Interactions between birds and people often caused birds to move or fly away, particularly when people were within 20 m. During a short observation period, 10% of humans and 39% of dogs disturbed birds. More than 70% of birds flew when disturbed. Bird species varied in the frequency that they were disturbed, partially because a few bird species foraged on the upper beach where contact with people was less frequent. Most disturbances occurred low on the beach. Although disturbances caused birds to move away from humans, most displacement was short enough that variation in human activity did not alter large-scale patterns of beach use by the birds. Birds were less reactive to humans (but not dogs) when beach activity was low.

Human and dog disturbance to shorebirds

McCrary, M. D., & Pierson, M. O. (2000). Influence of human activity on shorebird beach use in Ventura County, California. In Proceedings of the fifth California Islands symposium (pp. 424-427).

We studied the potential influence of human and dog activity on shorebird abundance at 13 sandy beaches in Ventura County, California. The 13 study beaches were randomly selected, and each beach was 1 km long. From June 1994 to May 1997, we counted all shorebirds, humans and dogs at each beach once per month for a total of 36 counts. We found no significant relationship between instantaneous counts of either shorebirds and human or dogs. However, there was a significant relationship among the 13 beaches between total shorebird and human use. The beaches with the greatest number of shorebirds (Ormond Beaches 1 through 3) were among those with the lowest number of humans. The results suggest that inaccessibility to humans may be an important aspect of shorebird habitat quality. Relatively undisturbed sandy beaches are quite rare in southern California, and the inaccessibility of the few remaining undisturbed beaches should be maintained. 

Dogs disturbing wintering plovers

Lafferty, K. D. (2001). Disturbance to wintering western snowy plovers.Biological Conservation, 101(3), 315-325.

In order to better understand the nature of disturbances to wintering snowy plovers, I observed snowy plovers and activities that might disturb them at a beach near Devereux Slough in Santa Barbara, California, USA. Disturbance (activity that caused plovers to move or fly) to wintering populations of threatened western snowy plovers was 16 times higher at a public beach than at protected beaches. Wintering plovers reacted to disturbance at half the distance (∼40 m) as has been reported for breeding snowy plovers (∼80 m). Humans, dogs, crows and other birds were the main sources of disturbance on the public beach, and each snowy plover was disturbed, on average, once every 27 weekend min and once every 43 weekday min. Dogs off leash were a disproportionate source of disturbance. Plovers were more likely to fly from dogs, horses and crows than from humans and other shorebirds. Plovers were less abundant near trail heads. Over short time scales, plovers did not acclimate to or successfully find refuge from disturbance. Feeding rates declined with increased human activity. I used data from these observations to parameterize a model that predicted rates of disturbance given various management actions. The model found that prohibiting dogs and a 30 m buffer zone surrounding a 400 m stretch of beach provided the most protection for plovers for the least amount of impact to beach recreation.

Perception of threatened species management on urban beaches

Maguire, G. S., Rimmer, J. M., & Weston, M. A. (2013). Stakeholder Perceptions of Threatened Species and Their Management on Urban Beaches.Animals, 3(4), 1002-1020.

Simple Summary: Coastal urbanisation brings humans into contact with beach-dwelling wildlife. Where wildlife are disturbance prone, active management is required to promote coexistence between beach-goers and endangered wildlife. Coexistence relies on people adopting wildlife-sensitive behaviours. This study examines factors, which influence people’s awareness and perceptions of threatened species management in southern Australia, using Hooded Plover Thinornis rubricollis management as a model. The inconvenience experienced by beach goers in regard to plover management was low. Awareness and support for plover conservation were high. Frequency of beach use, whether a person was a dog walker, and awareness of the species and its plight, influenced perceptions.


Abstract: We surveyed 579 recreationists regarding management of the threatened, beach-dwelling Hooded Plover Thinornis rubricollis. We postulated that: (1) lower awareness of the species and higher ‘inconvenience’ of management would engender less favourable perceptions of conservation and management; and (2) that frequency of beach use and dog ownership may mediate perceptions and levels of awareness and inconvenience. Overall, inconvenience was low while awareness and support for plover conservation were high.
Education and awareness strategies were considered less effective than regulations; exclusion and regulations were considered less desirable than on-ground protective measures. Awareness, frequency of beach use and dog walking did not influence the perceived effectiveness of different managements. More frequent beach users had greater awareness of the species and their plight but reported greater inconvenience associated with management. Respondents with high awareness rated the severity of human-related threats higher; low awareness was associated with more inconvenience associated with on-ground protection, and exclusion and regulations. Dog walkers reported more inconvenience associated with exclusions and regulations than non-dog walkers. Dog walkers who used the beach infrequently rated threats significantly higher than frequent beach users. Conservation and education strategies could usefully be tailored to beach users’ level of use and pet ownership.

Domestic dogs in Wildlife habitats

Sime, C. A. 1999. Domestic Dogs in Wildlife Habitats. Pages 8.1-8.17 in G. Joslin and H. Youmans, coordinators. Effects of recreation on Rocky Mountain wildlife: A Review for Montana. Committee on Effects of Recreation on Wildlife, Montana Chapter of The Wildlife Society. 307pp.

It is difficult to segregate human demographic trends from trends in rural development and outdoor recreational participation in settings like the West where they appear to be interrelated. One extension of human recreation in wildlife habitats is the effect of disturbance, harassment, displacement, or direct mortality of wildlife attributable to domestic dogs that accompany recreationists. At some level, domestic dogs still maintain instincts to hunt and/or chase. Given the appropriate stimulus, those instincts can be triggered in many different settings. Even if the chase instinct is not triggered, dog presence in and of itself has been shown to disrupt many wildlife species. Authors of many wildlife disturbance studies concluded that dogs with people, dogs on-leash, or loose dogs provoked the most pronounced disturbance reactions from their study animals. During winter, concerns are primarily related to human activity on ungulate winter ranges. Dogs extend the zone of human influence when off-leash. Many ungulate species demonstrated more pronounced reactions to unanticipated disturbances, as a dog off-leash would be until within very close range. In addition, dogs can force movement by ungulates (avoidance or evasion during pursuit), which is in direct conflict with overwinter survival strategies which promote energy conservation. During summer, concerns are primarily related to the birth and rearing of young for all wildlife species. Dogs are noted predators for various wildlife species in all seasons. Domestic dogs can potentially introduce diseases (distemper, parvovirus, and rabies) and transport parasites into wildlife habitats. While dog impacts to wildlife likely occur at the individual scale, the results may still have important implications for wildlife populations. For most wildlife species, if a “red flag” is raised by pedestrian-based recreational disturbance, there could also be problems associated with the presence of domestic dogs. Managers may consider the following when evaluating recreational impacts of dogs in wildlife habitats: species biology, reproductive potential, abundance, density, distribution, degree of habitat specificity or reliance on certain habitat components, and predisposition and sensitivity to disturbance by other agents. This information is intended to increase awareness among natural resource professionals and the public about the potential implications of uncontrolled domestic dogs in wildlife habitats and to encourage responsible outdoor recreation ethics.

Interactions among dogs, people and wildlife

Bekoff, M., & Meaney, C. A. (1997). Interactions among dogs, people, and the environment in Boulder, Colorado: A case study. Anthrozoos: A Multidisciplinary. Journal of The Interactions of People & Animals, 10(1), 23-31.

From September 1995 to April 1996 we studied interactions among dogs, people, and the environment in Boulder, Colorado. Data on behavioral disturbances by off-leash dogs who were accompanied by a person were collected with respect to dog-dog and dog-human interactions, dog-wildlife encounters, dogs trampling vegetation, and dogs entering and disturbing bodies of water. A questionnaire also was administered. Behavioral data showed that off-leash dogs generally did not travel far off trail, that when they did it was for short periods of time, and that they rarely were observed to chase other dogs, disturb people, chase wildlife, destroy vegetation, or enter bodies of water. Results from analyses of the questionnaire (skewed toward non-dog owners) showed that dog owners and non-dog owners agreed that people were more disruptive to the environment than dogs and that unruly people were more problematic than unruly dogs. We conclude that the well-being and interests of dogs should not summarily and dismissively be compromised when dogs and people attempt to share limited space that can be used by all parties for recreational purposes. Indeed, a higher percentage of people reported that the quality of dogs' experience of the outdoors would be compromised more than their own enjoyment if dogs could not walk off-leash in areas where this is currently permitted. The methods used and the results from this case study can serve as a model for other locations in which dogs and people compete for limited spatial resources.

Leash regulations lack of impact on small vertebrates

Forrest, A. & C.C. St. Clair. 2006. Effects of dog leash laws and habitat type on avian and small mammal communities in urban parks. Urban Ecosystems, 9:51–66

Remnant natural areas within urban settings can act as important refuges for wildlife, substantially increasing local biodiversity. However, habitat suitability for these species is potentially affected by human recreational activities including the presence of free-running dogs. To compare the diversity and abundance of songbird and small mammal communities between areas with bylaws that require, or do not require, dogs to be leashed, point counts and live-trapping surveys were conducted in three habitat types (deciduous, coniferous, and meadow) in the river valley parks of Edmonton, Alberta. Among birds, there was no difference between areas with different leashing bylaws in species diversity for any of the three habitat types. Similarly, there was no difference in bird diversity for a subset of species that were plausibly breeding at these sites. However, higher bird diversity was recorded in deciduous and coniferous sites than in meadow sites, regardless of leash designation, probably as a function of the horticultural practice of mowing meadows. Among both birds and small mammals, there was no difference in the abundance of individuals as a function of leashing bylaws. Our results suggest that off-leash dogs have no effect on the diversity or abundance of birds and small mammals in urban parks, but it is also possible that other factors, such as leash law compliance, reduced or obscured the effects of off-leash dogs in this study.

Disturbance of dogs to Wildlife

Lenth, B., R.L. Knight & M.E. Brennan. 2008. The Effects of Dogs on Wildlife Communities. Natural Areas Journal, 28 (3): 218-227

Domestic dogs (Canis familiaris) are frequent visitors to protected areas, but little is known about how they affect wildlife communities. We studied the effects of dogs on wildlife communities by comparing the activity levels of wildlife in areas that prohibited dogs with areas that allowed dogs. We measured wildlife activity on trails and up to 200 m away from trails using five methods: (1) pellet plots, (2) track plates, (3) remote triggered cameras, (4) on-trail scat surveys, and (5) mapping prairie dog (Cynomys ludovicianus) burrow locations. The presence of dogs along recreational trails correlated with altered patterns of habitat utilization by several species. Mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus) activity was significantly lower within 100 m of trails in areas that allowed dogs than in areas that prohibited dogs. Small mammals, including squirrels (Sciurus spp.) and rabbits (Sylvilagus spp.), also exhibited reduced levels of activity within 50 m of trails in areas that allowed dogs when compared with areas without. The density of prairie dog burrows was lower within 25 m of trails in areas that allowed dogs. The presence of dogs also affected carnivore activity. Bobcat (Felis rufus) detections were lower in areas that allowed dogs, and red fox (Vulpes vulpes) detections were higher. These findings have implications for the management of natural areas, particularly those that allow dogs to be off-leash.

Wildlife response to dogs

Miller, S.G., Knight, R.L. & Miller, C.K. 2001. Wildlife responses to pedestrians and dogs. Wildlife Society Bulletin, 29 (1): 124-132.

You can download here the homonimous report from 1996 

As participation in outdoor recreational activities escalates, land managers struggle to develop management policies that ensure coexistence of wildlife and recreation. However, this requires an understanding of how wildlife responds to various forms of recreational activities and the spatial context in which the activities occur. Therefore, we measured responses of 2 species of grassland songbirds, one species of forest songbird, and mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus) exposed to a pedestrian, a pedestrian accompanied by a dog on leash, and a dog alone (only for grassland birds), on and away from recreational trails. We assessed the "area of influence" for each treatment by determining the probability that an animal would flush or become alert (for mule deer only) given its perpendicular distance to a trail or a line of movement in areas without trails. When animals were disturbed, we measured flush distance (the distance between the disturbance and the animal when flushed), distance moved, and, for mule deer, alert distance (the distance between the disturbance and the deer when it became alert). For all species, area of influence, flush distance, distance moved, and alert distance (for mule deer) was greater when activities occurred off-trail versus on-trail. Generally, among on-trail and off-trail treatments in grasslands for vesper sparrows (Pooecetes gramineus) and western meadowlarks (Sturnella neglecta), the smallest area of influence and shortest flush distance and distance moved resulted from the dog-alone treatment, and these responses were greater for the pedestrian-alone and dog-on-leash treatments. In forests, for American robins (Turdus migratorius), the area of influence, flush distance, and distance moved did not generally differ between the pedestrian-alone and dog-on-leash treatments. For mule deer, presence of a dog resulted in a greater area of influence, alert and flush distance, and distance moved than when a pedestrian was alone. Natural lands managers can implement spatial and behavioral restrictions in visitor management to reduce disturbance by recreational activities on wildlife. Restrictions on types of activities allowed in some areas such as prohibiting dogs or restricting use to trails will aid in minimizing disturbance. Additionally, managers can restrict the number and spatial arrangement of trails so that sensitive areas or habitats are avoided.

Disturbance from dogs or from people?

Reed, S. & A.D. Merenlender. 2011. Effects of Management of Domestic Dogs and Recreation on Carnivores in Protected Areas in Northern California. Conservation Biology, 25(3):504-513

In developed countries dogs (Canis lupus familiaris) are permitted to accompany human visitors to many protected areas (e.g., >96% of protected lands in California, U.S.A.), and protected-area management often focuses on regulating dogs due to concerns about predation, competition, or transmission of disease and conflicts with human visitors. In 2004 and 2005, we investigated whether carnivore species richness and abundance were associated with management of domestic dogs and recreational visitation in protected areas in northern California. We surveyed for mammalian carnivores and human visitors in 21 recreation areas in which dogs were allowed offleash or onleash or were excluded, and we compared our observations in the recreation areas with observations in seven reference sites that were not open to the public. Carnivore abundance and species richness did not differ among the three types of recreation areas, but native carnivore species richness was 1.7 times greater (p < 0.01) and the relative abundances of native coyotes (Canis latrans) and bobcats ( Lynx rufus) were over four times greater (p < 0.01) in the reference sites. Abundances of bobcats and all carnivores declined as the number of visitors increased. The policy on domestic dogs did not appear to affect species richness and abundance of mammalian carnivores. But the number of dogs we observed was strongly associated with human visitation (R²= 0.54), so the key factors associated with recreational effects on carnivores appear to be the presence and number of human visitors to protected areas.