The Reptile Relocation Industry in Australia: Perspectives from Operators

There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

Abstract

Thousands of reptiles are relocated annually in Australia, yet there has been relatively little research aimed at understanding how the reptile relocation industry operates. An online questionnaire was distributed to anyone who had relocated a reptile between April 2019 and April 2020, including wildlife relocators, wildlife rehabilitators and the general public. The questionnaire explored demographics, decision-making and concerns about how the industry functions, through 24 questions and two opportunities to provide open-ended comments. We received 125 responses and 123 comments from operators in all Australian states and territories. Beliefs about appropriate times and places for reptile releases were not reflected in practice for the majority of operators. Confidence about reptiles remaining at recipient sites was low regardless of how many years’ experience an operator had. Escaped captive native reptiles were encountered by most operators, and a quarter of operators were called out to exotic non-native snakes. Operators across all levels of experience indicated a need for changes within the industry, including increased training and professionalism, and more scientific studies on the outcomes of relocations to address concerns about the impacts that the industry has on the wildlife that it is trying to protect.

Related collections

Most cited references 83

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Suitability of amphibians and reptiles for translocation.

Carla Germano, Richard Bishop (2009)

Translocations are important tools in the field of conservation. Despite increased use over the last few decades, the appropriateness of translocations for amphibians and reptiles has been debated widely over the past 20 years. To provide a comprehensive evaluation of the suitability of amphibians and reptiles for translocation, we reviewed the results of amphibian and reptile translocation projects published between 1991 and 2006. The success rate of amphibian and reptile translocations reported over this period was twice that reported in an earlier review in 1991. Success and failure rates were independent of the taxonomic class (Amphibia or Reptilia) released. Reptile translocations driven by human-wildlife conflict mitigation had a higher failure rate than those motivated by conservation, and more recent projects of reptile translocations had unknown outcomes. The outcomes of amphibian translocations were significantly related to the number of animals released, with projects releasing over 1000 individuals being most successful. The most common reported causes of translocation failure were homing and migration of introduced individuals out of release sites and poor habitat. The increased success of amphibian and reptile translocations reviewed in this study compared with the 1991 review is encouraging for future conservation projects. Nevertheless, more preparation, monitoring, reporting of results, and experimental testing of techniques and reintroduction questions need to occur to improve translocations of amphibians and reptiles as a whole.

0 comments Cited 91 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: found

Is Open Access

Household Factors Influencing Participation in Bird Feeding Activity: A National Scale Analysis

Zoe G. Davies, Richard Fuller, Martin Dallimer … (2012)

Ameliorating pressures on the ecological condition of the wider landscape outside of protected areas is a key focus of conservation initiatives in the developed world. In highly urbanized nations, domestic gardens can play a significant role in maintaining biodiversity and facilitating human-wildlife interactions, which benefit personal and societal health and well-being. The extent to which sociodemographic and socioeconomic factors are associated with engagement in wildlife gardening activities remain largely unresolved. Using two household-level survey datasets gathered from across Britain, we determine whether and how the socioeconomic background of a household influences participation in food provision for wild birds, the most popular and widespread form of human-wildlife interaction. A majority of households feed birds (64% across rural and urban areas in England, and 53% within five British study cities). House type, household size and the age of the head of the household were all important predictors of bird feeding, whereas gross annual household income, the occupation of the head of the household, and whether the house is owned or rented were not. In both surveys, the prevalence of bird feeding rose as house type became more detached and as the age of the head of the household increased. A clear, consistent pattern between households of varying size was less evident. When regularity of food provision was examined in the study cities, just 29% of households provided food at least once a week. The proportion of households regularly feeding birds was positively related to the age of the head of the household, but declined with gross annual income. As concerns grow about the lack of engagement between people and the natural environment, such findings are important if conservation organizations are successfully to promote public participation in wildlife gardening specifically and environmentally beneficial behaviour in society more generally.

0 comments Cited 46 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: not found
Article: not found

A conceptual model for the integration of social and ecological information to understand human-wildlife interactions

Tara Teel, Sarah Reed, Heather E Johnson … (2018)

0 comments Cited 46 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

All references

Author and article information

Contributors

Richard A. Fuller: (View ORCID Profile)

Journal

Journal ID (publisher-id): DIVEC6

Title: Diversity

Abbreviated Title: Diversity

Publisher: MDPI AG

ISSN (Electronic): 1424-2818

Publication date Created: March 2023

Publication date (Electronic): February 28 2023

Volume: 15

Issue: 3

Page: 343

Article

DOI: 10.3390/d15030343

SO-VID: 7875b09e-5923-4a46-887c-5c7d37fa698d

License:

https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

History

Data availability:

Comments

Comment on this article

scite_

Smart Citations

Citing PublicationsSupportingMentioningContrasting

View Citations

See how this article has been cited at scite.ai

scite shows how a scientific paper has been cited by providing the context of the citation, a classification describing whether it supports, mentions, or contrasts the cited claim, and a label indicating in which section the citation was made.