Baiting Predators for Conservation? New Research Weighs the Impact

The most comprehensive analysis of baiting efficacy conducted to date has published its results, containing insights into baiting efficacy and best practice.

A Dingo stands in an enclosure at the Dingo Discovery and Research Centre in rural Australia on May 25, 2009. William West/AFP/Getty Images

The most comprehensive analysis of baiting efficacy conducted to date has published its results, demonstrating baiting to be impactful in fox, feral cat and dingo populations, and offering insights into best practice.

Toxic baiting is the primary management technique used to control populations of these predator species and is an important tool for conservation and land managers. There are various other techniques, but it is by far the dominant method used.

The new research analysed data from 34 previous studies and found track baiting increased the probability of predator death by 46 percent compared to unbaited tracks.

The analysis also demonstrated that the type—for example, fresh or dry—did not have a significant impact on survival.

Also, despite their preference for fresh meat, feral cats were as susceptible to baits as foxes and dingoes.

Is It Needed?

Baiting is an important tool in the conservation of threatened species and is often considered a “necessary evil” in conservation circles.

Its limitations are recognised but there are few, if any, alternatives that can achieve the level of predator control necessary to protect and aid the recovery of threatened species.

Additionally, baiting is used to protect livestock, since dingoes and foxes can cause substantial losses at times.

Meat and Livestock Australia estimated that dingoes and foxes cost farmers around $65 million (US$41 million) and $35 million per year.

In 2022, South Australian Minister for Primary Industries and Regional Development Clare Scriven said wild dogs were a threat to South Australia’s sheep and cattle industries.

“Management of wild dogs is essential for the protection of our valuable livestock industries,” Scriven said.

However, there are relatively few studies demonstrating whether baiting itself helps to reduce livestock losses, with several studies suggesting baiting has no significant effect.

Popularity of Baiting

Study author and research fellow at the University of Adelaide, Patrick Taggart, said there are multiple reasons for the predominant use of baiting in fox, feral cat, and dingo control.

“While you can’t just buy baits at your local supermarket, they are broadly accessible if you do have a legitimate reason to access them and somewhere appropriate to distribute them,” he told The Epoch Times in an email.

“Typically, the cost of the baits themselves is relatively minimal (potentially free and up to approximately $3 per bait).”

In many rural regions of Australia, government officials provide injection days where land managers can bring their own bait, usually a lump of available red meat, to be injected with toxin for free.

Taggart said baits are also easy and fast to distribute. They can be distributed along tracks and roads by vehicle, or dropped from aircraft across vast areas, making baiting probably the only management technique suitable for large-scale application.

Other management techniques include ground shooting, traps, fencing, den or burrow fumigation, and guardian animals.

Area Distribution Baiting

The analysis found that the amount of bait per area mattered more than how often it was distributed.

This is attributed to bait aversion, a behaviour believed to develop from animals storing baits and eating them later when they are less toxic, causing them to get sick rather than die.

A single, more intensive application may work better because there is limited opportunity for bait aversion to develop.

However, no significant impact on survival was observed for area distribution programs. The chance of death was similar whether bait was spread across areas or along tracks and roads.

Harm to Native Species

Taggart said the most significant concern with baiting is the consumption of toxic baits by native, non-target species.

“The reality of impacts on native species is however very difficult to assess. Plenty of research shows that native, non-target species do take baits,” he said.

“But comparatively little research shows that this does actually translate to native species mortality or population impacts.”

The mortality rate of native species is difficult to determine because unless native species are actively being tracked and followed, it is hard to discern their fate after the bait is taken.

“However, we do know that many native Australian species do have a higher tolerance to 1080/sodium fluoroacetate relative to feral cats, foxes, and dingoes,” Taggart said.

“This is because the toxin is itself derived from native Australian plants.”

For native species that have been tracked, such as quolls, the impacts appear to be minimal.

However, some experts, like ecologist Arian Wallach, argue that lethal dingo control, predominantly achieved through baiting, contributes to the release of feral cats and foxes, which are more detrimental to native wildlife.

Reducing Non-Target Consumption

Taggart said to stop other animals from eating the bait, it is often buried or sometimes tethered to the deployment location.

He said non-target uptake is also a consideration when designing and refining bait ingredients and recipes, to attract target predators and not native wildlife.

However, the humaneness of the toxins used is debated.

Dog ingestion is another concern, although baiting programs require a high degree of notification and there are rules regarding proximity to dwellings.

Baiting Outside of Australia

Toxic baiting is widely used globally for the management of large predators, but in other countries, it is mainly used to control feral cats on islands.

Despite widespread use, relatively few accessible non-Australian studies examine or report on baiting efficacy to allow for information to be extracted for further analysis.

“For this reason, our research primarily included studies from Australia, with two studies from New Zealand and one from the Galapagos Islands,” Taggart said.