On Wed, 8 Nov 2006 16:38:39 -0000, "Denise"
<denise_research@*nospam*hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>"Richard Watkinson" <rwatki RemoveThis @orpheusmail.co.uk> wrote in message
>news:97bb4a824e.Richard@rwatki.orpheusnet.co.uk...
>>
>>
>> I've never read such drivel in my life.
>>
>> Grey Squirrels are a recognised pest regardless of their effect on Red
>> Squirrel populations.
>>
>> They cause untold damage to trees and nesting woodland bird
>> populations as well as damage to gardens which are close to woodland
>> areas.
>>
>> Total eradication is unlikely but if people realise the problem
>> numbers can be controlled by correctly carried out trapping - believe
>> me.
>>
>> Richard
>
>Okay this isn't going to be popular but felt I had to come out of lurking!
>The grey squirrel is a pest, sorry.
Only as much as the red is also a pest. The red was slaughtered into
extinction by man, not by the grey.
> It has brought about the demise of our
>native red.
That's nonsense. You need to read the information presenting the
facts. Not listen to a few village idiots with an axe to grind.
>I have no idea what the answer is but I do know we need to preserve our
>native wildlife.
Then read this.
Stephen Harris, Carl D. Soulsbury and Graziella IossaSchool of
Biological Science, University of Bristol, Woodland Rd, Bristol, BS8
1UG
SUMMARY
•Red squirrels populations have historically undergone large
population fluctuations.Causes include habitat loss and disease. At
various times in the 19thand 20thcentury,red squirrels from Europe
have been introduced to re-establish or augmentpopulations.
Genetically, red squirrels in Britain are not distinct from those in
Europe.•Grey squirrels have been introduced to various localities in
Britain. Despite culling,these populations have now spread over most
of England and Wales, and into manyparts of Scotland.
•Red squirrel populations are declining for two reasons: ecological
displacement bygrey squirrels, which may take many years, and squirrel
poxvirus (SQPV). Greysquirrels act as vectors for SQPV and aid the
spread of this disease into novel redsquirrel populations. Grey
squirrels quickly fill the vacant ecological niche when redsquirrel
populations die out from SQPV.
•It is widely argued that controlling grey squirrel numbers is the
best way ofconserving red squirrels. However, there is little evidence
to support this belief.Most squirrel control is carried out with
warfarin, but only live trapping and/orshooting can be carried out in
areas with reds.Attempts to create animmunocontraceptive for grey
squirrels have failed and no biological control methodsare currently
available.
•Most control is done within the context of protecting commercial
woodlands fromsquirrel damage. There is mixed evidence that grey or
red squirrel control worked;bounties schemes in the past have proved
unsuccessful at lowering populationnumbers. Success has been limited
to isolated populations such as islands; greysquirrels can colonize
areas quickly, so most grey squirrel control is ineffective.
•Grey squirrels can damage commercial forestry and are cited as having
a negativeimpact on woodland birds. Whilst the evidence with regard to
commercial forestry isunequivocal, controlling squirrel numbers is not
always effective and currentsilviculture techniques may exacerbate the
problem. There is at best limited data tosuggest the minor role of
grey squirrel’s impact on two species of woodland bird.These arguments
ignore damage to forestry and predation on woodland birds
thathistorically were attributed to red squirrels when they were more
abundant. Inaddition, no consideration is given to the benefits that
grey squirrels may have,including the formation of deadwood, an
important component of biodiversewoodlands
•Culling of grey squirrels could lead to more problems than solutions.
Culling maylead to an increased localised density, an increase in
forest damage levels andincrease the spread of disease.
•Red squirrel populations will continue to decline in the face of
increased ecologicaldisplacement by grey squirrels and SQPV. Novel
techniques need to be devised toprotect red squirrels. These include
setting island refugia, and developing aneffective and humane way to
eliminate grey squirrels.
•Large sums of money are being spent on red squirrel conservation.
However, thismoney is not spent wisely. Whilst red squirrels are
native to Britain, many of thepopulations are recently introduced
European stock, and so even if red squirrels doeventually disappear
from Britain, they could easily be reintroduced again. Globally,red
squirrel populations are not threatened and the conservation effort in
Britain is of little importance.
INTRODUCTION
The purpose of this document is two-fold. It aims to describe evidence
from the scientificliterature about the costs (financial and
ecological), benefits and role of grey squirrel cullingin red squirrel
conservation while at the same time examining whether grey squirrel
culling isa long-term solution to red squirrel conservation or whether
other solutions need to bedeveloped.
THE HISTORY OF RED SQUIRRELS IN BRITAIN
The Eurasian red squirrel (Sciurus vulgaris) is a widespread species
found in most woodedareas of Eurasia from Iberia to Kamchatka
Peninsula and Sakhalin Island (Russia), and GreatBritain south to
Mediterranean and Black Sea, north Mongolia, west and north-east
China(Gurnell, 1991; Lurz et al., 2005; Wilson & Reeder, 2005). In
Britain, the red squirrel wasthought to be distinct subspecies (S.
vulgaris leucorus) characterised by a distinctive annualbleaching of
hair, especially on the tail and ears (Lowe & Gardner, 1983). However,
recentDNA analysis indicated no evolutionary divergence between
British and continentalpopulations (Barratt et al., 1999). This is
unsurprising for two reasons; first populations inBritain have been
isolated for a relatively short time (8000 years) since the last ice
age andmay not have evolved sufficiently to acquire monophylognetic
status (Barratt et al., 1999);second, red squirrels were deliberately
reintroduced into Scotland and England fromcontinental stock at
various times during the last 150 years (Ritchie, 1920; Lowe &
Gardiner,1983), and many were also imported from the continent as a
food source and may haveescaped (Freethy, 1983). Further genetic
analysis supports this earlier hypothesis, although itwas suggested
that most British squirrels are descended from more recent
introductions fromScandinavia (Hale et al., 2004). Using museum
specimens, Kitchener et al. (2003) suggestedthat the Cumbrian
population of red squirrels remained a distinctive British subspecies,
andthat other populations were the result of introductions. However,
further museum workshowed a temporal loss of distinctive phenotypic
characteristics from the Cumbrianpopulation, which was caused by
increased gene flow into the population following increasedplanting of
woodland, which linked the Cumbrian and Scottish populations (Hale et
al.,2001; Hale & Lurz, 2003). As a consequence, all British red
squirrels represent a mixedgenetic stock (Barratt et al., 1999; Hale
et al., 2004).
Populations of red squirrels are notably volatile, undergoing marked
changes in numbersboth in the long- and short-term. Historically,
populations of red squirrel declined to nearextinction during the
18thcentury as a consequence of deforestation, eventually
necessitatingthe reintroduction of red squirrels from the continent
(Yalden, 1999). During the 19thcentury, forest plantations originally
planted at the end of the 18thcentury reached maturity.This led to an
increase in the squirrel population to the extent they were considered
a majorpest and necessitated culling (Tittensor, 1975). Locally they
became so numerous that redsquirrel destruction clubs were formed and
a bounty scheme implemented (Ritchie, 1920;Shorten, 1954). Large
numbers of squirrels were killed; over fifteen years, the Highland
Squirrel Club killed 60,500 red squirrels in just one area (Ritchie,
1920). Later populationdeclines during 1900-1930 have been linked to a
disease epizootic (Middleton, 1930). Sincethe 1940s population size
and distribution of the red squirrel in Britain have
contracted,largely in parallel with the increase in range of the grey
squirrel (Sciurus carolinensis).
THE POPULATION OF GREY SQUIRRELS IN BRITAIN
The grey squirrel is a native of eastern North America, inhabiting a
range of forestedhabitats, particularly deciduous woodland. The grey
squirrel has repeatedly been introducedto Britain between 1870-1930.
Notable introductions include 100 in Richmond Park, Surreyand 91 in
Regent’s Park, London (Shorten, 1954). Introductions were not confined
tosouthern England, but included releases all over Britain. With such
large numbers releasedand at so many points, it is perhaps
unsurprising that grey squirrel populations took hold inthis country.
Initially, populations spread locally; in 1920 populations were
focused aroundinitial release points, but by 1945 grey squirrels had
expanded their range to much ofsouthern and central England, although
spread into East Anglia and the southwest occurredlater. Later surveys
in 1970 and 1990 indicated that grey squirrel populations had
coveredmost of England and Wales, with two separate populations in
Scotland; one was basedaround the mid-Lothian, Fife, Tayside and
Glasgow, a second was limited to Aberdeen andthe surrounding area
(Lloyd, 1983; Gurnell & Pepper, 1993). The population in theAberdeen
area was thought to be isolated from the more southern population and
itsappearance was a result of a deliberate introduction. However,
Staines (1986) suggested thatthe Aberdeen population was the result of
natural colonisation from central Scotland, and thenon-contiguous
nature of some grey squirrel distribution maps in Scotland reflect
poorsurvey coverage of some areas.
CAUSES OF RED SQUIRREL POPULATION DECLINE
Causes of red squirrel populations declines can be categorised into
three factors: habitat loss,ecological replacement by grey squirrels
and disease.Habitat loss and red squirrel declines
Habitat loss has been an important factor in the decline of red
squirrels in the past. Thewidespread destruction of forests led to the
almost complete extinction of red squirrels inBritain (Ritchie, 1920;
Gurnell, 1987). Only through reintroductions from continental stockand
the increase in forestry plantations did the red squirrel recover.
However, the frequency with which certain tree species have been
planted are important. For example, pre-1920,40% of planted woodland
was oak; this habitat can lead to a competitive disadvantageagainst
grey squirrels (see section on ecological replacement). Currently,
habitat loss is notan important factor in red squirrel declines and
forest coverage is increasing (ForestryCommission, 2001; Scottish
Environment Statistics, 2006); however, the suitability of thisnew
forest for red squirrels is low. Habitat preferences of red squirrels
vary with locationand densities (Bryce et al., 2002; 2005).
It is considered that ‘good’ habitat for red squirrels are those that
reds utilise, but grey squirrels avoid. These include Norway spruce,
larch andDouglas fir (Bryce et al., 2002). Poor habitat was either
selected by greys or avoided byreds; these include sitka spruce
(avoided by both species) and Scots pine (used by both).Overall, the
planting of forests in England and Scotland has not increased the area
of suitablered squirrel habitat (Table 1), and in fact the increase in
broadleaved woodland has been ofgreater benefit to grey squirrels
(Table 1).Table 1. The changes in woodland cover in England
(1980-1998) (Forestry Commission,2001) and Scotland (1980-1995)
(Scottish Environment Statistics, 2006), with the suitabilityof
habitat for squirrels based on definitions by Bryce et al.
(2002)SpeciesPercentage forestchange (England)Percentage forestchange
(Scotland)Suitability forsquirrelsSitka spruce+14+61Poor for both
speciesNorway spruce-21-28Good for bothDouglas fir+3+1Good for
redsEuropean larch-34-39Good for redsMixed/Japanese larch-3+21Good for
redsScots pine-5+8Poor for bothBroadleaved woodland+36+68Good for
greysWhether a habitat is ‘good’ for red squirrel is highly dependent
on tree seed productivity.Coniferous woodland can have red squirrel
densities equal to deciduous woodlands (Gurnell,1987; Lurz et al.,
1995; Wauters & Lens, 1995), but this is highly dependent on
speciescomposition and age structure of the forest; man-made
coniferous woodland in northernEngland have the lowest seed
productivity and lowest red squirrel density (Wauters et al.,2001). It
has been suggested that introduced red squirrels from Scandinavia are
better adapted to spruce dominated woodlands, and so are able to
tolerate these habitats more thanthe ‘native’ red squirrel (Hale et
al., 2004). However, quantitative data supporting thishypothesis are
absent. The idea that coniferous plantation are ‘good’ habitat for
reds is false;in many places they simply provide a refuge habitat into
which grey squirrels have difficultyin spreading.
Ecological replacement by grey squirrels
There are areas of Britain where red and grey squirrels coexisted for
a number of years(Teanganna et al., 2000; Bryce et al., 2002). In some
cases, red squirrels populations becomeextinct after many years of
coexistence (Harris, 1973/74; Reynolds, 1985). This contrastswith the
disease-induced declines of red squirrels which are followed by rapid
colonizationby grey squirrels (see section on diseases). Due to this
apparently slow pattern ofreplacement, it has been suggested that grey
squirrels are out competing red squirrels. Datafrom coniferous
woodland showed little direct interspecific competition with grey
squirrel(Wauters et al., 2000); there was no evidence that either
adult survival rates or the proportionof female breeding decreased
(Wauters & Gurnell, 1999; Wauters et al., 2000), althoughhowever, both
female red squirrel fecundity and juvenile recruitment were reduced in
thepresence of grey squirrels (Wauters & Gurnell, 1999; Gurnell et
al., 2004). In deciduouswoodland, grey squirrels are better able to
exploit acorn crops and have a competitiveadvantage over hazelnut
crops; this is predicted to lead to slow replacement of red
squirrelsby greys (Kenward & Holm, 1993). The different feeding
abilities of the two species makesred squirrels more vulnerable to
food shortages (Gurnell & Pepper, 1993), which may lead toa reduction
in the number of breeding females and subsequent recruitment into
thepopulation. The presence of grey squirrels also makes it hard for
juvenile red squirrels toestablish territories. This competitive
advantage is greatest in deciduous woodland; the rateof replacement is
thought to be related to habitat composition, with populations
coexistingfor longer in coniferous habitats (Bryce et al., 2002).
However, as suggested by Gurnell etal. (2004), even in these habitats,
it appears that red squirrel populations will decline and redsquirrels
will only persist where they have a competitive advantage over greys.
Diseases and squirrel population declines
Red squirrel populations seem particularly susceptible to diseases and
historically, diseasehas caused many population declines (Middleton,
1930; Edwards, 1960; Vizoso, 1968; Scottet al., 1981; Keymer, 1983).
It is now known that a disease, squirrel poxvirus (SQPV), is a
significant factor in red squirrel declines (Tompkins et al., 2002;
Thomas et al.,2003).Whether SQPV was introduced to Britain along with
grey squirrels is unclear (Daszak et al.,2000), but it is more likely
that SQPV was endemic within the native red squirrel population,as the
symptoms of this disease have been described from red squirrel
populations prior tothe introduction of the grey squirrel (Middleton,
1930). What is clear is that grey squirrelsact as hosts without
developing the disease (Sainsbury et al., 2000) and they aid the
spread ofdisease into previously unexposed red squirrel populations
(Daszak et al., 2000). They thentake over the vacant ecological niche
caused by the red squirrel’s extinction (Tompkins et al.,2002). The
speed of red squirrel loss is markedly faster in the presence of the
disease thansolely with ecological replacement (Ruston et al., 2006).
By tackling the spread of thisdisease, red squirrel population loss
will be markedly slower.
What will happen to red squirrel populations?There are two main
factors causing current red squirrel declines: ecological replacement
bygreys and disease. In the absence of SQPV, it is predicted that red
squirrels would becomerestricted to those habitats where grey
squirrels cannot out-compete reds. However, SQPV isan important
factor. If this disease enters novel red squirrel populations, it is
likely that redswill die out and be replaced by greys, even in these
poorer quality habitats.
CONTROLLING GREY SQUIRRELS
There are four approaches to conserving red squirrels: stop grey
squirrels spreading SQPV,stop greys colonizing new habitat and
replacing red squirrels, control of the disease andincreasing suitable
habitat for red squirrels. Intuitively, the simplest method would
appear tobe to stop grey squirrels spreading, and so this is the
approach most widely implemented.This is done through some form of
population control: culling (poisoning, shooting,trapping),
immunocontraception or biological control.Grey squirrel population
control: cullingThere are four methods of culling: poisoning, spring
trapping, shooting and live trapping.Of these, poisoning is banned in
areas with red squirrels, and for all other locations it isdiscouraged
due to the likelihood of non-target species poisoning. Spring trapping
(a killingtrap) is also discouraged due to the indiscriminate nature
of the traps (Hodge & Pepper, 1998;Mayle et al., 2004). Three
techniques predominate: poisoning (where not banned), shootingand live
trapping.
Poisoning
Poisoning with warfarin is favoured in most commercial woodlands,
where it is viewed asboth cheap and effective (Taylor et al., 1968;
Pepper, 1990; Mayle et al., 2004). There issome risk that poisoned
squirrels carcasses may be consumed by scavengers. Fifty-sevenpercent
of warfarin poisoned squirrels fell to the grounds and 25% of these
were scavenged(Kenward, 1988). Warfarin has a short half-life and is
not usually present at high levels inthe bodies of poisoned animals.
This is because death is relatively slow and there is ampletime for
much of the toxicant to be metabolized or excreted (Record & Marsh,
1988).Exposure to warfarin through scavenging is not thought to have a
large risk of mortality tonon-target species, but may have unknown
sub-lethal affects (Townsend et al., 1981).However, direct exposure to
warfarin can be important. Wood & Phillipson (1977) estimatedthat
55-65% of bait for grey squirrels was consumed by non-target species,
primarily rodents;this can cause significant local population declines
(Brakes & Smith, 2005). Poisoning ofnon-target species is another
route to secondary poisoning in predators and scavengers(Brakes &
Smith, 2005). Warfarin is the recommended poison to control squirrels,
but asurvey by McDonald & Harris (2000) showed that 46% of game
estates used poisons otherthan warfarin to control grey squirrels.
These second generation compounds have longer halflives than first
generation poisons such as warfarin, and so the risk of secondary
poisoning isincreased (McDonald & Harris, 2000). Species regularly
exposed to warfarin can evolvegenetic resistance to its toxicity (e.g.
Quy et al., 1992). If this trait evolves in grey squirrels(Taylor et
al., 1968), the use of other poisons may lead to even higher
incidences ofsecondary poisoning in rare and threaten species (Carter
& Burn, 2000; Mason & Littin,2003). Furthermore, anticoagulants such
as warfarin are described as “markedly inhumane”by the Pesticides
Safety Directorate and there is pressure from the EU to reduce the use
ofpesticides in the countryside (Anon, 1997; Forestry Commission,
2006).
Shooting
Shooting can take place in two forms: shooting of individuals located
whilst walking througha forest, or drey poking which involves
targeting dreys with poles to flush out squirrels to beshot. The
latter is considered more effective (Tittensor, 1975). Although
shooting is anotherwidely used method to control populations, it is
viewed as insufficient to reduce squirrelnumbers significantly (Hodge
& Pepper, 1998).
Live trapping
Live trapping is considered the most effective technique to catch grey
squirrels (Gurnell,1999), and is the main technique used where red
squirrels are present e.g. Thetford Forest(Gurnell & Steele,
2002).Traps are typically baited with whole maize and it isrecommended
that traps are checked twice daily (Tittensor, 1975; Mayle et al.,
2004).Captured grey squirrels can then be euthanased and any
non-target species released unharmed.
Grey squirrel population control: immunocontraception and biological
control
Immunocontraception relies on inducing an immune response which
attacks the host’sreproductive system. Delivery mechanisms are
typically through either bait or a vectoredmechanism such as a virus
(Barlow, 2000). The idea to control grey squirrel reproduction isnot
new (Johnson & Tait, 1983), and there have been attempts to create a
bait deliveredcontraceptive (Moore, 1997). Initial field trials
indicated a drop in pregnancy rate from 50%to 15% (Pepper & Moore,
2001). However, as yet no effective mechanism has beendeveloped
(Rushton et al., 2002) and recently funding into this topic has been
ceased(Forestry Commission, 2006; JNCC, 2006). Whilst
immunocontraceptives have beendeveloped for a range of species such as
elephants (Loxodonta africana) (Fayer-Hosken etal., 2000) and
brushtail possums (Trichosurus vulpecula) (Cowan, 1996), there are few
dataon their effectiveness as a management tool (Ramsey, 2005). For
some populations ofcertain species e.g. white-tailed deer (Odocoileus
virginianus) (Rudolph et al., 2000), fertilitycontrol has led to a
significant decrease in population size, whilst for other
species,demographic compensation (increased longevity, increased
reproductive rates or increasedimmigration) can negate the effects of
fertility control (Twigg & Williams, 1999; Ramsey,2005). As yet there
is no clear consensus on the effectiveness of immunocontraception as a
technique to manage large populations. It is also unclear how species
with contrasting lifehistory strategies will respond to fertility
control (Caughley et al., 1992; Hone 1992), andspecies, such as grey
squirrels, with increasing populations or high reproductive rates may
bemost resilient to fertility control. In addition, it is likely that
in species with highreproductive rates there will be selective
pressure to evolve resistance to theimmunocontraceptive (Magiafoglou
et al., 2003). Certainly, a lot more work needs to bedone before the
technique can be applied to a successful invasive species such as the
greysquirrel.
Biological control can be in two forms, control through a disease or
parasite (Rowe, 1983;Dobson 1988), or through the introduction of a
predator (Rowe, 1983; Simberloff & Stiling,1996). Examples of
biological control agents include rabbit haemorrhagic disease (RHD)
inAustralia (Kovaliski, 1998). Currently no biological methods are
available for grey squirrels,and there may be unknown ecological
effects of introducing a biological control agent intothe environment.
As a consequence the only other option would be natural predators
ofsquirrels such as pine martens (Martes martes) and goshawks
(Accipiter gentilis) (Rowe,1983). However, as a result of long term
persecution, current populations of both predatorsare most abundant in
areas containing red squirrels, not greys; predation on red squirrels
isnot thought to be a direct threat to population viability
(Halliwell, 1997; Petty et al., 2003),and it is highly unlikely that
these predators would have a significant impact on grey
squirrelpopulations. So whilst the use of natural predators as a
biological control of grey squirrelsappears an attractive option, it
is unlikely to have a significant impact on either the spread ofgrey
squirrels or population size.
EFFECTIVENESS AND COST OF CONTROL TECHNIQUES
It is not possible to eradicate the grey squirrel from Britain using
current control methods(Gurnell & Pepper, 1993). Grey squirrels are
resilient to control both through rapidrecolonization of vacated areas
and by increasing their reproductive rate to compensate forlosses
(Lawton & Rochford, 1999). There is widespread evidence suggesting
that controltechniques and programs have had little or no success in
lowering the grey squirrelpopulation. Recent calls for a grey squirrel
bounty (Horne, 2006) are misguided. Previousbounty schemes during the
1950s culled 1.5 million squirrels but did little to impact
thepopulation even though they were a lot lower (Sheail, 1999, 2003;
Forestry Commission,2006). More locally, trapping in Thetford Forest
did not lower the population of greysquirrels, despite trapping 2200
squirrels in 4600 ha over a three year period (Gurnell &Steele, 2002).
A long-term poisoning campaign in Lady Park Wood, Gloucestershire, did
notprevent woodland damage; in fact, it actually increased during this
period (Mountford, 1997).The level of squirrel control through
shooting had no effect on squirrel numbers (Fitzgibbon,1993), and
evidence from spring trapping suggests no reduction in the number of
squirrelscaught (E. Brun cited in Huxley, 2003). However, if selected
and designed correctly,effective squirrel control can be targeted
locally usually through poisoning rather thanshooting or trapping
(Kenward et al., 1988a). Kenward et al. (1996) showed that all
squirrelsin a marked population could be removed in five weeks of
poisoning when poisoning effort was widespread through a vulnerable
wood. However, Lawton & Rochford (1999) showedthat culling regimes
only caused a temporary reduction in density, and that recolonisation
canbe extremely rapid. Recolonisation time varies from three months in
an isolated area to onlyone month in an area that is not isolated
(Mayle et al., 2004). Poole & Lawton (2004)showed that following five
culls, populations recovered to pre-cull levels in 3-10 weeks. Inthe
short-term, culling may only have a temporary effect on the
population. In particular,localised culling will be offset rapidly by
immigration from unculled areas. If a source-sinksystem is created,
this may lead to higher populations in culled areas and may
actuallyincrease the speed of grey squirrel spread (Pulliam, 1988).The
cost of control must also be considered as well as the effectiveness
of culling squirrels.Cost of control varies primarily by method used.
In most cases, the intensity of effort isinsufficient for effective
control. Costs are generally lowest in poisoning, but costs of
othermethods vary with intensity of use (Table 2). Give its low cost,
poisoning is the preferred method of control; in 1992, 140,000 grey
squirrels were poisoned, compared to 11,000 trapped (Pepper,
1992).Table 2. The costs of different forms of grey squirrel control.
* based on mean costs fordifferent areas of woodland. ** indicates
cost estimated.MethodologyCost/ha/annumSourceLive trapping£2.61Gurnell
et al. (1997)Warfarin£0.21-£6.00*Kenward et al.
(1988a)Warfarin£3.92Kenward & Dutton (1996)Spring trapping£12.50E.
Brun cited in Huxley (2003)Immunocontraception£12.84**Ruston et al.
(2002)Warfarin£17.62Huxley (2003)Spring trapping &
shooting£23.75Huxley (2003)Live trapping£59.49**Ruston et al
(2002)Costs of squirrel control can vary markedly (Table 2); for
example, costs of warfarin controlper hectare decrease with increasing
wood size (Kenward et al., 1988a) and increase withintensity of effort
(Kenward & Dutton, 1996). The costs of culling techniques must be
offsetby the benefits, which include financial costs through reduced
damage to tree (see section: other perceived negative impacts on grey
squirrels) or whether it can prove an effectivemethod to conserved red
squirrels. Given this cost-benefit of squirrel control,
warfarinpoisoning is the favoured technique, despite the concerns over
humaneness and itsindiscriminate nature.
There have been recent calls by a number of agencies including
Scottish Natural Heritage tocull grey squirrels to control spread into
areas inhabited by red squirrels (Horne, 2006).However, past
experience shows that there is no evidence to suggest this will be
successful.
The most successful eradication of grey squirrels has been on
Anglesey, Wales, where theremoval of 6,000 squirrels in five years has
allowed red squirrel populations to increase(Shuttleworth et al.,
2002). The success of this effort has been in part due to the
geographyof Angelsey; being an island with limited connections to the
mainland has meant greysquirrels were unable to repopulate culled
areas. In contrast, there has been considerable trapping effort in
Thetford Forest, East Anglia, without any discernible effect on
greysquirrel numbers (Gurnell & Steel, 2002). The cost of controlling
mainland populations islarge; Rushton et al. (2002) estimated that it
would cost £300,000 per annum to ensure thepersistence of red
squirrels in Thetford Forest. Similarly, in Redesdale
Forest,Northumberland the cost would be £200,000 per annum. The key
aspect of squirrel controlis immigration into areas following control,
and so culling would be more productive inisolated populations. Recent
plans by Aberdeen City Council to cull grey squirrels seem
particularly misguided, as it is suggested that grey squirrel
populations in Aberdeen City and Deeside are isolated from those
further south (Anon., 2006). Yet this assertion contradicts other
evidence; Staines (1986) suggested that Aberdeen’s grey squirrels
immigrated from thesouth, and maps in Poulsom et al. (2005) indicate a
contiguous grey squirrel population allalong the east coast of
Scotland. So culling grey squirrels in Aberdeen will have no effect
onthe grey squirrel population and will not aid red squirrel
conservation; whilst culling maylower population size in the short
term, the high dispersal abilities of grey squirrels meansthat
recolonization is inevitable. Modelling by Rushton et al. (2006)
suggested that during aten year period, culling of greater than 60% of
the population per annum was necessary tostop grey squirrels spreading
SQPV into the Cumbrian red squirrel population, and hence toensure red
squirrel persistence. Targeted or intensive culling in areas where
grey squirrelsare spreading may be effective, but must be very long
term and is thus expensive. However,this is a prediction based on
computer modelling and there are no field data to show whethersuch
intensive culling will prevent the spread of SQPV. So, what the costs
(ecological and financial) and benefits of intensive culling remains
unclear. In contrast to areas where greysquirrels are spreading, it is
not considered practical to exterminate grey squirrels where theyare
already established (Mayle et al., 2004).
OTHER METHODS TO STOP RED SQUIRREL DECLINES
There are four alternative approaches to red squirrel conservation
that do not involve cullinggrey squirrels. The first is the
establishment of red squirrel populations on islands that haveno grey
squirrels. Current islands that harbour red squirrel populations
include the Isle ofWight, islands in Poole harbour and Angelsey
(Harris et al., 1995; Rushton et al., 1999).Red squirrels have been
introduced to the isle of Arran in Scotland (Poulsom et al.,
2005).There are several other islands, particularly in Scotland, that
currently have suitablewoodland but no red squirrels (Scottish
Squirrel Group, 2004); including Mull in Scotland(Shuttleworth, 2005).
Establishing viable populations on islands will secure the future of
redsquirrels in Britain. In addition, should grey squirrels ever
become introduced onto these islands, the experience on Anglesey has
shown culling would be an effective strategy toremove them.
The second aspect that would aid red squirrel conservation would be
the development of aSQPV vaccine. While this would not stop ecological
replacement of red squirrels, it wouldslow their decline. Recently
McInnes & Middleton (2005) estimated the cost of developing aSQPV
vaccine. Initial costs ran to £416,000 for three years; however, they
acknowledge thatthis does no include extensive field trials, nor an
indication of timescale. Though large, thesecosts are smaller than the
£1.1 million planned for red squirrel conservation in northernEngland
(NWT, 2006). SQPV is widespread in grey squirrels in northern England,
where ithas already been found in red squirrels (McInnes & Nettleton,
2005), and so despite the £1.1million pledged to their conservation,
red squirrels populations in northern England willcontinue to decline
as a result of SQPV.
In the absence of SQPV, red and grey squirrels have been shown to
coexist for many years(e.g. Harris, 1973/74; Bryce et al., 2002). This
is because in some habitats, grey squirrels donot have such a
competitive advantage over red squirrels. Without SQPV and any
greysquirrel intervention, it is probable that red squirrel
populations would survive in areas wherethey have a greater
competitive advantage over grey squirrels. Habitat is a key aspect
toconserving red squirrels (Lurz et al., 1998), as they require a
dependable seed supply (Lurz etal., 1998; 2000), which depends on tree
composition (Lurz et al., 1998) and forest age structure (Gurnell &
Pepper, 1993). To ensure a constant seed supply may mean altering
felling patterns and forest design plans (Lurz et al., 2003). Red
squirrels appear to have theability to utilise production conifer
plantations (Lurz et al., 2000), which presents a paradox,as the
majority of commercial forestry in Britain comprises blanket, similar
aged, non-nativeconiferous species with low biodiversity levels
(Willis & Garrod, 1998). However, changes in management practises are
being urged so that future plantations have higher biodiversitylevels.
These include recommendations such as leaving some stands to develop
old-growthconditions (Fuller & Brown, 2003; Humphrey, 2005), increase
structural diversity by leavingdeadwood, increasing tree species
composition, habitat restoration (e.g. to peatlands),mimicking natural
disturbances regimes and using species of local genetic origin (see
Quine,2003). If such regimes are implemented, plantations may have
great benefits to biodiversity(Humphrey et al., 2003), but without
these changes, planting more monoculture plantationeven to aid red
squirrel conservation would be an ecological disaster.
Ecological replacement of red squirrels by greys is linked to the
reduced ability of juvenilereds to be recruited in the population
(Wauters & Gurnell, 1999; Wauters et al., 2000) andreduced fecundity,
possibly through reduced breeding condition (Gurnell et al.,
2004).Supplementary feeding of red squirrels may be one way to
counteract this affect and so mayhelp increase red squirrel
persistence, particularly in deciduous woodland. This could onlyoccur
in the absence in SQPV, but this strategy could be useful if found to
promote redsquirrel population persistence.
OTHER ECOLOGICAL AND ECONOMIC IMPACTS OF GREY SQUIRRELS
Other negative impacts of grey squirrels: tree damageOther than the
well documented decline in red squirrels, grey squirrels are cited as
having amajor economic impact by damaging trees in commercial
plantations. Much evidencesupports the damage that grey squirrels can
cause to woodland (Kenward, 1983); however,red squirrels are also
known to causes significant damage to trees (Tittensor, 1970), to
theextent they were considered a major pest prior to the introduction
of grey squirrels (Ritchie,1920). Both species (Table 3) and age of
tree influences grey squirrel damage. The twoprimary species damaged
across several studies were sycamore and beech; other species
areattacked to varying degrees depending on site (Lawton & Rochford,
1999). Thin barkedspecies of between 10 and 40 years are at particular
risk (Kenward et al., 1988). Damage canresult in loss of apical
dominance, infection of wood through the wounds, loss of vigour or
even death (Gurnell & Mayle, 2003). Several factors are known to
affect the rate of damage.Juvenile squirrel density is correlated to
bark stripping intensity (Kenward et al. 1988a),whilst tree quality
gave the best correlation to damage levels (Kenward, 1989).
Thepercentage ground cover (Kenward et al., 1991), number of seed
bearing tree species(Kenward et al., 1988b) and growth rate of the
attacked tree (Mountford & Peterken, 1999)are other important
variables affecting level and intensity of grey squirrel damage.
Damageis not linked to food availability (Kenward et al., 1988a).
Identifying factors that can predictdamage is of particular use in
planning control strategies (Mayle et al., 2004). Current silviculture
techniques may increase damage, as the choice of fast-growing species
(Table 3)and growing trees close together encourages fast vertical
growth, which all increase thesusceptibility of woodlands to damage
(Lawton, 2003).Table 3. The percentage of stands of different species
showing occurrence of damage(Mayle, 2003 cited in Huxley, 2003) in
comparison to the percentage area of woodland inEngland (Forestry
Commission, 2001)Tree species% stands showing damageArea (% total
woodland)Sycamore1004.9Beech666.5Oak4016.1Ash3310.6Lodgepole
pine33-Scots pine16-Norway spruce16-Larch84.7Sweet chestnut8-The
financial cost of grey squirrel damage is somewhat controversial and
must be balancedagainst the costs of squirrel control over a long
period. For example, Kenward & Dutton(1996) estimated the costs of
moderate to severe squirrel damage to beech. Over an 85 yearrotation
this was estimated at £1700/ha (Kenward & Dutton, 1996). Considering
that themain vulnerable age group is 10-40 year (Mayle et al., 2004),
annual cost of damage worksout at £57/ha/annum. Over the thirty year
period, the cost of squirrel control with warfarin isconsiderably
cheaper (Table 1), but only if it is sustained and totally eliminates
damage. As a consequence, the costs of control may outweigh the
benefits (Lawton & Rochford, 1999;Forestry Commission, 2006). If taken
across all woodland in Britain, the cost of squirreldamage can be
viewed as substantial (Huxley, 2003), but it is difficult to
extrapolate financial losses over both a period of cropping and with
variable damage intensity.
At present we know that the exact benefits of controlling grey
squirrels can be highlyvariable. For example, both Mountford (1997)
and Rayden & Savill (2004) cite continuedtree damage despite grey
squirrel control programs. Squirrel control may even increasedamage to
woods; agnostic behaviour is cited as one reason for squirrel damage
and this ishigher when populations are increasing or when large
numbers of immigrants are movinginto a vacant area, conditions that
can be caused by culling of squirrels (Lawton & Rochford,1999). There
are two strategies to control grey squirrel damage: to control grey
squirrelnumbers or controlling the extent of the damage (Lawton &
Rochford, 1999). To counteractthe need for squirrel control, better
use of silviculture techniques, including the selection ofless
susceptible species and reducing planting density, could greatly
reduce squirrel damage,and so reduce both the need for continuous
control, which in turn has considerable financialbenefits. The only
way to further understand this issue is to model the economic costs of
greysquirrel damage, and the costs and benefits of different control
strategies, both culling andhabitat management.
Other negative impacts of grey squirrels: bird predation Grey
squirrels are often cited as predators of bird’s eggs and fledglings
(Monckton, 1991),yet proper quantitative data are lacking (Hewson &
Fuller, 2003; Hewson et al., 2004) andthe majority of evidence is
anecdotal. A recent survey indicated that of eight woodland
birdspecies showing declines, only two rarer species may have showed a
decline related to greysquirrel abundance (Amar et al., 2006).
However, this evidence cannot be directly linked topredation. Of the
remaining six species, the authors suggested that changes in
woodlandstand structure, such as increased woodland age, reduction in
active management andincreased deer browsing, may be responsible for
these declines (Amar et al., 2006). Thefocus on grey squirrels ignores
the fact the red squirrels themselves are important predatorsof bird’s
nests both in urban (Jokimäki & Huhta, 2000) and rural environments
(Nour et al.,1993).It has also been suggested that grey squirrels
compete with hazel dormice(Muscardinus avellanarius) for food and
woodland bats for resting sites (Hewson et al.,2004). However, direct
evidence to support these hypotheses is absent. Both red and
greysquirrels fill similar ecological niches; as a consequence it is
likely that red squirrels too are important predators of bird’s nests
and competitors in the same way greys are. The focus onthe negative
aspects of grey squirrels ignores the same role played by the native
red.
Positive impacts of grey squirrels
A survey in 2002 by The Mammal Society indicated that 45% of people
liked grey squirrelswhilst only 24% dislike grey squirrels (Fig. 1).
Clearly, many people enjoy the grey squirrelas part of the environment
(Mayle et al., 2004), but outside any intrinsic value, there has
beenno direct focus on the role of grey squirrels as beneficial to the
environment. Damage totrees can be beneficial (Forestry Commission,
2006), as wounding can provide habitat forsaproxylic fungi and
invertebrates, which in turn provide food for woodland birds.
Treeskilled by squirrel damage can also provide valuable nesting sites
for a range of species.Deadwood is an important part of woodland
biodiversity (Humphrey et al., 2002). Barkstripping in particular is
focused on sycamores (Table 3), an invasive species (Royal
ForestrySociety, 2006). Grey squirrels may actually help control
sycamore growth in some forests.The extent to which grey squirrels act
as seed dispersers is unknown, though they excise theradicle of
acorns, causing germination failure (Pigott et al. 1991); however,
whether thisalters the long term dynamics of woodland is
unknown.01020304050DislikeNo strong
feelingLikeResponse%ofrespondantsFigure 1. The percentage of
respondents (n = 3606) who disliked, had no strong feeling, orliked
grey squirrels, based on a scale of 1-10 (1-3: dislike; 4-7: no strong
feeling; 8-10:like)(Baker & Harris, unpublished data)
WHAT ARE THE IMPACTS OF CULLING STRATEGIES ON GREY AND REDSQUIRRELS
The evidence as to whether grey squirrel culling benefits red
squirrels is controversial. Ashas been shown on Angelsey, the removal
of grey squirrels led to a population increase andrecolonization of
areas of the island by red squirrels (Shuttleworth et al., 2002).
Thiscontrasts with Thetford Forest, where long term trapping found no
benefits to red squirrels(Gurnell et al., 1997; Gurnell & Steele,
2002); control strategies, although expensive, arepredicted to allow
red squirrel populations to persist (Rushton et al., 2002; 2006).
However,the exact positive or negative affects of grey squirrel
control is unclear. In American redsquirrels (Tamiasciurus
hudsoncius), removal of individuals led to immigration of males
andfemale of breeding condition (Klenner, 1991). Ultimately
immigration can compensate forculling losses e.g. in red foxes (Vulpes
vulpes) (Baker & Harris, 2006). In addition, both theincrease of
reproductive individuals in an area, or overcompensation by a culled
population,can lead to an increase in density (Choisy & Rohani, 2006)
and associated tree damage.Culling also has serious implications for
the spread of disease; culling can ultimately increasethe possibility
of cross-species transmission (Donnelly et al., 2003, 2005; Chisy &
Rohani,2006), by altering density or by disturbing population spatial
structure (Tuyttens et al., 2000;Woodroffe et al., 2005). In the
context of grey squirrels, increased culling could lead togreater
movement of individuals which may increase the spread of SQPV to novel
redsquirrel populations.
HOW CAN WE CONSERVE RED SQUIRRELS?
Conserving red squirrels in Britain remains a challenge. There is no
longer a ‘native’ red squirrel due to the frequent introductions from
Europe and habitat defragmentation which hasallowed gene flow between
previously sub-divided populations.The red squirrel iswidespread and
common over much of its distribution (Lurz et al., 2005), and so it
isquestionable why such large sums of money should be spent conserving
this species.Conservation effort on red squirrels in Britain is
disproportionate to its importance in globalconservation. Red
squirrels can be reintroduced again to Britain, if an effective and
humaneway of reducing/eliminating grey squirrels is eventually found.
There appears to be littleevidence to support the benefits of culling
grey squirrels for red squirrel conservation,particularly in the
long-term. Grey squirrels cannot be exterminated from Britain by
culling.
Previous attempts to control grey squirrels when grey squirrel
distribution was markedlysmaller did not stop or slow the spread. With
SQPV and continued ecological replacementby grey squirrels, red
squirrels will continue to decline in Britain.
Since culling is not a tactic that will benefit red squirrel
populations, is long-term and costly,novel techniques need to be
considered in grey squirrel population management for redsquirrel
conservation. Creating island refugia would ensure their persistence
in Britain, whiledeveloping a SQPV vaccine would markedly slow
population declines. A significant stepforward would be to identify
techniques that would lead to a decline in grey squirrelpopulations.
These might include the release of a biological control agent or a=
virus-vectored immunocontraceptive (VVIC), although currently
prognosis for either technique isvery low. Concern would be raised
about transmission of a VVIC to red squirrels; however,even if red
squirrels also became extinct along with greys, red squirrels could
bereintroduced, as has happened in the past. Another possibility would
be to examine ways ofallowing red and grey squirrels to coexist.
REFERENCES
Anon. (1997) Assessment of humaneness of vertebrate control agents.
Unpublished PSDreport.Anon. (2006) NSS/CS/April 2006/Red
squirrel.Amar, A., Hewson, C.M., Thewlise, R.M., Smith, K.W., Fuller,
R.J., Lindsell, J.A., Conway,G., Butler, S. & MacDonald, M. (2006)
What’s happening to our woodland birds? Long-term changes in the
population of woodland birds. BTO Research Report No.
169,Thetford.Baker, P.J. & Harris, S. (2006) Does culling reduce fox
(Vulpes vulpes) density in commercialforests in Wales, UK? European
Journal of Wildlife Research, 52, 99-108.Barlow, N.D. (2000) The
ecological challenge of immunocontraception: editor’s
introduction.Journal of Applied Ecology, 37, 897-902.Barratt, E.M.,
Gurnell, J., Malarky, G., Deaville, R. & Bruford, M.W. (1999) Genetic
structureof fragmented population of red squirrel (Sciurus vulgaris)
in the UK. Molecular Ecology,8, s55-s63.Brakes, C.R. & Smith, R.H.
(2005) Exposure of non-target small mammals to rodenticides:short-term
effects, recovery and implications for secondary poisoning. Journal of
AppliedEcology, 42, 118-128.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Page 20
20Bryce, J., Cartmel, S. & Quine, C.P. (2005) Habitat use by red and
grey squirrels: results oftwo recent studies and implications for
management. Forestry Commission InformationNote, Forestry Commission,
Edinburgh.Bryce, J., Johnson, P.J. & Macdonald, D.W. (2002) Can niche
use in red and grey squirrelsoffer clues for their apparent
coexistence? Journal of Applied Ecology, 39, 875-887.Carter, I. &
Burn, A. (2000) Problems with rodenticides: the threat to red kites
and otherwildlife, British Wildlife, 11, 192-197.Caughley, G., Pech,
R. & Grice, D. (1992) Effect of fertility control on a
population’sproductivity. Wildlife Research, 19, 623-627.Choisy, M. &
Rohani, P. (2006) Harvesting can increase severity of wildlife disease
epidemics.Proceedings of the Royal Society: B, Online early.Cowan,
P.E. (1996) Possum biocontrol: prospects for fertility regulation.
Reproduction,Fertility and Development, 8, 655-660.Daszak, P.,
Cunningham, A.A. & Hyatt, A.D. (2000) Emerging infectious diseases of
wildlife– threats to biodiversity and human health. Science, 287,
443-449.Dobson, A.P. (1988) Restoring island ecosystems: the potential
of parasites to controlintroduced mammals. Conservation Biology, 2,
31-39.Donnelly, C.A., Woodroffe, R., Cox, D.R., Bourne, J., Cheeseman,
C. L., Clifton-Hadley, R. S.;Wei,G.,Gettinby, G.,Gilks, P.,Jenkins,
H.,Johnston, W. T.,Le Fevre, A. M., McInerney, J. P. & Morrison, W. I.
(2005) Positive and negative effectsof widespread badger culling on
tuberculosis in cattle. Nature, 439, 843-846.Donnelly, C.A.,
Woodroffe, R., Cox, D.R., Bourne, J., Gettinby, G., Le Fevre,
A.M.,McInerney, J.P. &Morrison, W.I. (2003) Impact of localized badger
culling ontuberculosis incidence in British cattle. Nature, 486,
834-837.Edwards, F.B. (1960) Red squirrel disease. Veterinary Record,
74, 739-741.Fayrer-Hosken, R.A., Grobler, D., Van Altena, J.J.,
Bertschinger, H.J. & Kirkpatrick, J.F.(2000) Immunocontraception of
African elephants. Nature, 407, 149.Forestry Commission (2006)Annex:
towards a Forestry Commission England grey
squirrelpolicy.http://www.forestry.gov.uk/pdf/greysquirrel-annex.pdf/$FILE/greysquirrel-annex.pdfFitzgibbon,
C.D. (1993) The distribution of grey squirrel dreys in farm woodland:
the influenceof wood area, isolation and management. Journal of
Applied Ecology, 30, 736-742.Freethy, R. (1983) Man and beast: the
natural and unnatural history of British mammals.Blandford Press,
Poole.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Page 21
21Fuller, R. & Browne, S. (2003) Effects of plantation structure and
management on birds. InBiodiversity in Britain’s planted forests (eds
J. Humphrey, R. Ferris & C. Quine), pp93-99.Forestry Commission,
Edinburgh.Gurnell, J. (1987) The natural history of squirrels.
Christopher Helm, London.Gurnell, J., Pepper, H., 1993. A critical
look at conserving the British red squirrel Sciurusvulgaris. Mammal
Review, 23, 125-136.Gurnell, J. & Mayle, B. (2003) Ecological impacts
of the alien grey squirrel (Sciuruscarolinensis) in Britain.
MammAliens – a one day conference on the problems caused bynon-native
British mammals. People’s Trust for Endangered Species,
London.Gurnell, J., Sainsbury, T. & Venning, T. (1997) Conserving the
red squirrel Sciurus vulgaris inThetford Forest. English Nature
Research Reports No. 262, English Nature, Peterborough.Gurnell, J. &
Steele, J. (2002) Grey squirrel control for red squirrel conservation:
a study inThetford Forest. English Nature Research Reports No. 453,
English Nature, Peterborough.Gurnell, J., Wauters, L.A., Lurz, P.W.W.
& Tosi, G. (2004) Alien species and interspecificcompetition: effects
of introduced eastern grey squirrels on red squirrel
populationdynamics. Journal of Animal Ecology, 73, 26-35.Hale, M.L. &
Lurz, P.W.W. (2003) Morphological changes in a British mammal as a
result ofintroductions and changes in landscape management: the red
squirrel (Sciurus vulgaris).Journal of Zoology, 260, 159-167.Hale,
M.L., Lurz, P.W.W., Shirley, M.D.F., Rushton, S., Fuller, R.M. &
Wolff, K. (2001)Impacts of landscape management on the genetic
structure of red squirrel populations.Science, 293, 2246-2248.Hale,
M.L., Lurz, P.W.W. & Wolff, K. (2004) Patterns of genetic diversity in
the red squirrel(Sciurus vulgaris L.): footprints of biogeographic
history and artificial introductions.Conservation Genetics, 5,
167-179.Halliwell, E.C. (1997) Red squirrel predation by pine martens
in Scotland. The conservation ofred squirrels Sciurus vulgaris L. (Ed.
by J.Gurnell & P.W.W.Lurz)., pp 39-48. People'sTrust for Endangered
Species, London.Harris, S., Morris, P., Wray, S. & Yalden, D. (1995) A
review of British mammals: populationestimates and conservation status
of British mammals other than cetaceans. Joint NatureConservation
Committee, Peterborough.Hewson, C., Fuller, R., Mayle, B. & Smith , K.
(2004). Possible impacts of grey squirrels onbirds and other wildlife.
British Wildlife, 15, 183-191.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Page 22
22Hewson, C.M. & Fuller, R.J. (2003) Impacts of grey squirrels on
woodland birds: animportant predator of eggs and young? BTO Research
Report No. 328, Thetford.Hodge, S. & Pepper, H. (1998) Preventing
mammal damage in woodlands. Forestry AuthorityPractise Note, Forestry
Commission, Edinburgh.Hone, J. (1992) Rate of increase and fertility
control. Journal of Applied Ecology, 29, 695-698.Horne, M. (2006)
Sights are set on grey squirrel cull. The Sunday Times, 4thJune
2006.Humphrey, J.W. (2005) Benefits to biodiversity from developing
old-growth conditions inBritish upland spruce plantations: a review
and recommendations. Forestry, 78, 33-53.Humphrey, J., Ferris, R. &
Quine, C. (2003) Biodiversity in Britain’s planted forests.
ForestryCommission, Edinburgh.Humphrey, J.W., Stevenson, A. and
Swailes, J. (2002) Life in the Deadwood: a Guide to theManagement of
Deadwood in Forestry Commission Forests. Forest Enterprise
LivingForests Series. Forest Enterprise, Edinburgh.Huxley, L. (2003)
The grey squirrel: profile of an alien species: grey squirrel
(Sciuruscarolinensis). ESI Dorset.Johnson, E. & Tait, A.J. (1983)
Prospects for the chemical control of reproduction in the
greysquirrel. Mammal Review, 13, 167-172.Joint Nature Conservation
Committee (2006)http://www.jncc.gov.uk/page-3233Jokimäki, J. & Huhta,
E. (2000) Artificial nest predation and abundance of birds along
anurban gradient. The Condor, 102, 838-847.Kenward, R.E. (1983) The
causes of damage by red and grey squirrels. Mammal Review,
13,159-166.Kenward, R.E. (1988) The potential of radiotagging in
trials of agrochemicals. Field Methodsfor the Study of the
Environmental Effects of Pesticides (eds M.P. Greaves, B.D. Smith,
&P.W. Grieg-Smith,), pp 137–145. British Crop Protection Council
Monograph 40. ThorntonHeath, BCPC, UK.Kenward, R.E. (1989)
Bark-stripping by grey squirrels in Britain and North America: whydoes
the damage differ? Mammals as pests, (ed R.J. Putman), pp 144-154.
Chapman &Hall, London.Kenward, R.E. & Dutton, J.C.F. (1996) Damage by
grey squirrels II the values of prediction.Quarterly Journal of
Forestry, 90, 211-218.Kenward, R.E., Dutton, J.C.F., Parish, T.,
Doyle, F.I.B., Walls, S.S. & Robertson, P.A. (1996)Damage by grey
squirrels I bark stripping correlates and treatment. Quarterly Journal
ofForestry, 90, 135-142.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Page 23
23Kenward, R.E. & Holm, J.L. (1993) On the replacement of the red
squirrel in Britain: aphytotoxic explanation. Proceedings of the Royal
Society: B, 251, 187-194.Kenward, R.E., Parish, T. & Doyle, F.I.B.
(1988b) Grey squirrel bark-stripping II managementof woodland
habitats. Quarterly Journal of Forestry, 82, 87-94.Kenward, R.E.,
Parish, T., Holm, J. & Harris, E.H.M. (1988a) Grey squirrel
bark-stripping Ithe role of tree quality, squirrel learning and food
abundance. Quarterly Journal ofForestry, 82, 9-20.Kitchener, A.C.,
Peacock, G., Lynch, J.N. & Gurnell, J. (2003) Geographical variation
inBritish red squirrel, Sciurus vulgaris. 3rdInternational colloquium
on the ecology of
treesquirrels,7thEuropeanSquirrelWorkshop,FordCastle,Northumberland.www.ncl.ac.uk/clsm/itsc/abstract%20booklet.docKeymer,
I.F. (1983) Diseases of squirrels in Britain. Mammal Review, 13,
155-158.Klenner, W. (1991) Red squirrel population dynamics II
Settlement patterns and the responseto removals. Journal of Animal
Ecology, 60, 979-993.Kovaliski, J. (1998) Monitoring the spread of
rabbit hemorrhagic disease virus as a newbiological agent for control
of wild European rabbits in Australia. Journal of WildlifeDiseases,
34, 421-428.Lawton, C. (2003) Controlling grey squirrel damage in
Irish broadleaved woodlands.COFORD Connects, Silviculture/Management
No. 7, Council for Forestry Research andDevelopment, Dublin.Lawton, C.
& Rochford, J. (1999) The ecology of the grey squirrel in relation to
broadleavedwoodland in Ireland. COFORD Report 2-5-95, COFORD,
Dublin.Lloyd, H.G. (1983) Past and present distribution of red and
grey squirrels. Mammal Review,13, 69-80.Lowe, V.P.W & Gardiner, A.S.
(1983) Is the British squirrel (Sciurus vulgaris leucourus
Err)British? Mammal Review, 13, 57-67.Lurz, P.W.W., Garson, P.J. &
Ogilvie, J.F. (1998) Conifer species mixtures, cone crops andred
squirrel conservation. Forestry, 71, 67-71.Lurz, P.W.W. & Garson, P.J.
& Rushton, S.P. (1995) The ecology of squirrels in sprucedominated
plantations: implications for forest management. Forest Ecology
andManagement, 79, 79-90.Lurz, P.W.W., Garson, P.J. & Wauters, L.A.
(2000) Effects of temporal and spatial variation infood supply on the
space and habitat use of red squirrels, Sciurus vulgaris L.. Journal
ofZoology, 251, 167-178.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Page 24
24Lurz, P.W.W., Geddes, N., Lloyd, A.J., Shireley, M.D.F., Rushton,
S.P. & Burlton, B. (2003)Planning a red squirrel conservation area:
using a spatially explicit population dynamicsmodel to predict the
impact of felling and forest design plans. Forestry, 76, 95-108.Lurz,
P.W.W., Gurnell, J. & Magris, L. (2005) Sciurus vulgaris. Mammalian
Species, 769, 1-10.Magiafoglou, A., Schiffer, M., Hoffmann, A.A. &
McKechnie, S.W. (2003)Immunocontraceptive for population control: Will
resistance evolve? Immunology and CellBiology, 81, 152-159.Mason, G. &
Littin, K.E. (2003) The humaneness of rodent pest control. Animal
Welfare, 12,1-37.Mayle, B., Pepper, H. & Ferryman, M. (2004)
Controlling grey squirrel damage to woodlands.Forestry Commission
Practise Note 4, Forestry Commission, Edinburgh.McDonald, R.A. &
Harris, S. (2000) The use of fumigants and anticoagulant rodenticides
ongame estates in Great Britain. Mammal Review, 30, 57-64.McInnes,
C.J. & Nettleton, P.F. (2005) Routes to the development of a
parapoxvirus vaccinefor red squirrels. English Nature Report 645,
Peterborough.Middleton, A.D. (1930) The ecology of the American grey
squirrel in the British Isles.Proceedings of the Zoological Society
London, 809-843.Monckton, A.S. (1991) Grey squirrel control. Quarterly
Journal of Forestry, 85, 268-269.Moore, H.D.M. (1997) On developing an
immunocontraceptive vaccine for grey squirrels,Sciurus carolinensis.
The conservation of red squirrels, Sciurus vulgaris L. (eds J.
Gurnell& P.W.W. Lurz), pp 127 -131. People's Trust for Endangered
Species, London, UK.Mountford, E.P. & Perkins, G.E. (1999) Effects of
stand structure, composition and treatmenton bark-stripping beech by
grey squirrels. Forestry, 72, 379-386.Northumberland Wildlife Trust
(2006) Green light given to Red Alert! Wildlife trusts welcome£1
million SOS
success.http://www.jncc.gov.uk/pdf/ukrsg_SOSAnnouncement.pdfNour, N.,
Matthysen, E. & Dhondt, A.A. (1993) Artificial nest predation and
habitatfragmentation: different trends in bird and mammal predators.
Ecography, 16, 111-116.Pepper, H.W. (1990) Grey squirrel damage
control with warfarin. Forestry CommissionResearch Information Note
180. Forestry Commission, Edinburgh.Pepper, H & Moore, H. (2001)
Squirrel Management 1. Development of a contraceptivevaccine for the
grey squirrel. Forest Research Annual Report and Accounts
1999-2000,Forestry Commission, Edinburgh.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Page 25
25Petty, S.J., Lurz, P.W.W. & Ruston, S.P. (2003) Predation of red
squirrels by northerngoshawks in a conifer forest in northern England:
can this limit squirrel numbers and createa conservation dilemma.
Biological Conservation, 111, 105-114.Pigott, C.D., Newton, A.C. &
Zammit, S. (1991) Predation of acorns and oak seedlings by
greysquirrel. Quarterly Journal of Forestry, 85, 173-178.Poole, A. &
Lawton, C. (2004) The impact of control on grey squirrel population
dynamics.www.coford.ie/iopen24/pub/pub/Seminars/2004/mammals04/07-AlanPoole.pdfPoulsom,
L., Griffiths, M., Broome, A. & Mayle, B. (2005) Identification of
prioritywoodlands for red squirrel conservation in North and Central
Scotland: a preliminaryanalysis. Scottish Natural Heritage
Commissioned Report No. 89 (ROAME No.F02AC334).Pulliam, H.R. (1988)
Sources, sinks and population regulation. American Naturalist, 132,
652-661.Quine, C. (2003) An introduction to biodiversity research. In
Biodiversity in Britain’s plantedforests (eds J. Humphrey, R. Ferris &
C. Quine), pp 7-18. Forestry Commission, EdinburghQuy, R.J., Shepherd,
D.S. & Inglis, I.R. (1992) Bait avoidance and effectiveness
ofanticoagulant rodenticides against warfarin- and
difenacoum-resistant populations ofNorway rats Rattus norvegicus. Crop
Protection, 11, 14-20.Ramsey, D. (2005) Population dynamics of
brushtail possums subject to fertility control.Journal of Applied
Ecology, 42, 348-360.Rayden, T.J. & Savill, P.S. (2004) Damage to
beech woodlands by the grey squirrel. Forestry,77, 249-253.Record,
R.C. & Marsh, R.E. (1988) Rodenticide residues in animal carcasses and
theirrelevance to secondary hazards. Proceedings of the Thirteenth
Vertebrate Pest Conference,(eds A.C.Crabb & R.E.Marsh), pp 163-168.
University of California, Davis.Reynolds, J.C. (1985) Details of the
geographic replacement of the red squirrel (Sciurusvulgaris) by the
grey squirrel (Sciurus carolinensis) in eastern England. Journal of
AnimalEcology, 54, 149-162.Ritchie, J. (1920) The influence of man on
animal life in Scotland. A study in faunal evolution.Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge.Rowe, J.J. (1983) Squirrel management.
Mammal Review, 13, 173-181.Rudolph, B.A., Porter, W.F. & Underwood,
H.B. (2000) Evaluating immunocontraception formanaging suburban
white-tailed deer in Irondequoit, New York. Journal of
wildlifeManagement, 64, 463-473.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Page 26
26Rushton, S.P., Gurnell, J., Lurz, P.W.W. & Fuller, R.M. (2002)
Modelling impacts and costs ofgrey squirrel control regimes on the
viability of red squirrel populations. Journal ofWildlife Management,
66, 683-697.Rushton, S.P., Lurz, P.W.W., Gurnell, J. & Fuller, R.
(2000) Modelling the spatial dynamics ofparapooxvirus disease in red
and grey squirrels: a possible cause of ...(message truncated)
>> Stay informed about: Culliing Grey Squirrels 
FAQ
Search
Profile
Private Messages
Log in/Register/Password
