Next Article in Journal
Contradiction and Complacency Shape Attitudes towards the Toll of Roads on Wildlife
Previous Article in Journal
Dietary Lecithin Decreases Skeletal Muscle COL1A1 and COL3A1 Gene Expression in Finisher Gilts
Previous Article in Special Issue
Welfare Impacts of Pindone Poisoning in Rabbits (Oryctolagus cuniculus)
Article

Moles and Mole Control on British Farms, Amenities and Gardens after Strychnine Withdrawal

The Wildlife Conservation Research Unit, Department of Zoology, The Recanati Kaplan Centre, University of Oxford, Tubney House, Abingdon Road, Tubney, Abingdon OX13 5QL, UK
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Academic Editors: Marina von Keyserlingk, Kate Littin, Trudy Sharp and Ngaio Beausoleil
Animals 2016, 6(6), 39; https://doi.org/10.3390/ani6060039
Received: 26 February 2016 / Revised: 15 April 2016 / Accepted: 9 May 2016 / Published: 8 June 2016
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Ethical and Welfare Dimensions of the Management of Unwanted Wildlife)
Moles are considered pests in Britain, but this issue has been little studied. Lower welfare standards have been tolerated for moles than for most other managed wild mammal species, as use of both the controversial poison, strychnine, and unregulated traps have been permitted. Strychnine was withdrawn in 2006 and there were fears that mole populations would increase as a result. In 2007, we conducted a comprehensive, nationwide survey of land manager perceptions, opinions and behaviour regarding moles and mole control on farms, amenities and domestic gardens in Britain. We surveyed 2150 land managers (achieving a 59% response rate) and ground-truthed 29 responses. Moles were reported to be present on most farms and amenities, and 13% of gardens, and were more common in lighter soils. Where present, moles were usually considered pests, this being more likely in Wales, Scotland and northern England, on livestock and mixed farms, and on large, high-value amenities, e.g., racecourses and golf courses. Mole control followed similar patterns to mole presence. More control may occur than is economically, and therefore potentially ethically, justified. Control should be more carefully considered and, where necessary, more effectively targeted. Kill-trapping was the favoured recent and future method on farms and amenities, even if strychnine was to be reintroduced; however, because mole traps are currently unregulated, some might not meet current welfare standards if tested. We found no evidence for an increase in moles since a farm questionnaire survey conducted in 1992; this could have wider implications for future wildlife management policy changes. View Full-Text
Keywords: European mole; Talpa europaea; farms; amenities; gardens; mole control; strychnine; trapping; silage; questionnaire European mole; Talpa europaea; farms; amenities; gardens; mole control; strychnine; trapping; silage; questionnaire
Show Figures

Figure 1

MDPI and ACS Style

Baker, S.E.; Ellwood, S.A.; Johnson, P.J.; Macdonald, D.W. Moles and Mole Control on British Farms, Amenities and Gardens after Strychnine Withdrawal. Animals 2016, 6, 39. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani6060039

AMA Style

Baker SE, Ellwood SA, Johnson PJ, Macdonald DW. Moles and Mole Control on British Farms, Amenities and Gardens after Strychnine Withdrawal. Animals. 2016; 6(6):39. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani6060039

Chicago/Turabian Style

Baker, Sandra E., Stephen A. Ellwood, Paul J. Johnson, and David W. Macdonald. 2016. "Moles and Mole Control on British Farms, Amenities and Gardens after Strychnine Withdrawal" Animals 6, no. 6: 39. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani6060039

Find Other Styles
Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Access Map by Country/Region

1
Back to TopTop