Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/1959.11/16866
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorMarks, Clive Aen
dc.contributor.authorObendorf, Daviden
dc.contributor.authorPereira, Filipeen
dc.contributor.authorEdwards, Ivoen
dc.contributor.authorHall, Grahamen
dc.date.accessioned2015-04-01T15:17:00Z-
dc.date.issued2014-
dc.identifier.citationWildlife Society Bulletin, 38(4), p. 757-766en
dc.identifier.issn1938-5463en
dc.identifier.issn0091-7648en
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/1959.11/16866-
dc.description.abstractDespite the absence of direct observation of live foxes in the Tasmanian environment, a recent study concluded that foxes are now widespread on the island and proposed a habitat-specific model incorporating 9 cases of physical evidence presumed to confirm their unique presence. We briefly review the history of fox incursions into Tasmania and then assess the quality of putative physical evidence against a defined evidentiary standard. Overall, 14 of 17 incidents described since 1998 were associated with between 1 and 4 criteria indicative of unreliable data or were not associated with adequately documented physical evidence. Anonymous and anecdotal information was fully or partially relied upon in 10 of 17 cases and of these 5 were widely acknowledged to be hoaxes. We conclude that opportunistically acquired evidence is a poor substitute for data obtained by properly designed and independent wildlife surveys for confirming unique fox incursions and as the basis of ecological models predicting true habitat-specific fox distribution. Species rarity decreases the reliability of wildlife surveys and population models; thus validation of unique incursions in particular requires appropriate rigor in evidentiary standards and data quality. Precautionary management that may be considered in response to uncertain information, or opportunistically collected specimens of doubtful provenance, does not imply that such information should be treated as scientific data. We suggest that an eradication program is justified as a precautionary measure only after rigorous qualitative analysis reveals data capable of rejecting the null hypothesis that the species of interest is absent.en
dc.languageenen
dc.publisherWildlife Societyen
dc.relation.ispartofWildlife Society Bulletinen
dc.titleOpportunistically Acquired Evidence is Unsuitable Data to Model Fox ('Vulpes vulpes') Distribution in Tasmaniaen
dc.typeJournal Articleen
dc.identifier.doi10.1002/wsb.448en
dc.subject.keywordsInvasive Species Ecologyen
dc.subject.keywordsCommunity Ecology (excl Invasive Species Ecology)en
dc.subject.keywordsAnimal Behaviouren
local.contributor.firstnameClive Aen
local.contributor.firstnameDaviden
local.contributor.firstnameFilipeen
local.contributor.firstnameIvoen
local.contributor.firstnameGrahamen
local.subject.for2008060801 Animal Behaviouren
local.subject.for2008050103 Invasive Species Ecologyen
local.subject.for2008060202 Community Ecology (excl Invasive Species Ecology)en
local.subject.seo2008960804 Farmland, Arable Cropland and Permanent Cropland Flora, Fauna and Biodiversityen
local.subject.seo2008960403 Control of Animal Pests, Diseases and Exotic Species in Farmland, Arable Cropland and Permanent Cropland Environmentsen
local.profile.schoolZoologyen
local.profile.schoolZoologyen
local.profile.schoolZoologyen
local.profile.schoolZoologyen
local.profile.schoolSchool of Environmental and Rural Scienceen
local.profile.emailghall20@une.edu.auen
local.output.categoryC1en
local.record.placeauen
local.record.institutionUniversity of New Englanden
local.identifier.epublicationsrecordune-20150331-155459en
local.publisher.placeUnited States of Americaen
local.format.startpage757en
local.format.endpage766en
local.identifier.scopusid84904444655en
local.peerreviewedYesen
local.identifier.volume38en
local.identifier.issue4en
local.contributor.lastnameMarksen
local.contributor.lastnameObendorfen
local.contributor.lastnamePereiraen
local.contributor.lastnameEdwardsen
local.contributor.lastnameHallen
dc.identifier.staffune-id:ghall20en
local.profile.roleauthoren
local.profile.roleauthoren
local.profile.roleauthoren
local.profile.roleauthoren
local.profile.roleauthoren
local.identifier.unepublicationidune:17100en
local.identifier.handlehttps://hdl.handle.net/1959.11/16866en
dc.identifier.academiclevelAcademicen
local.title.maintitleOpportunistically Acquired Evidence is Unsuitable Data to Model Fox ('Vulpes vulpes') Distribution in Tasmaniaen
local.output.categorydescriptionC1 Refereed Article in a Scholarly Journalen
local.search.authorMarks, Clive Aen
local.search.authorObendorf, Daviden
local.search.authorPereira, Filipeen
local.search.authorEdwards, Ivoen
local.search.authorHall, Grahamen
local.uneassociationUnknownen
local.identifier.wosid000351434500013en
local.year.published2014en
local.subject.for2020310901 Animal behaviouren
local.subject.for2020410202 Biosecurity science and invasive species ecologyen
local.subject.for2020310302 Community ecology (excl. invasive species ecology)en
local.subject.seo2020180606 Terrestrial biodiversityen
local.subject.seo2020180602 Control of pests, diseases and exotic species in terrestrial environmentsen
Appears in Collections:Journal Article
School of Environmental and Rural Science
Files in This Item:
3 files
File Description SizeFormat 
Show simple item record

SCOPUSTM   
Citations

7
checked on Mar 9, 2024

Page view(s)

1,190
checked on Mar 7, 2023
Google Media

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric


Items in Research UNE are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.