Box Traps for Feral Swine Capture: A Comparison of Gate Styles in Texas

Many different types of traps have been developed to increase feral swine (Sus scrofa) capture efficiency. Though not previously compared, gate styles may influence capture success. Our objectives were to report feral swine capture data from 31 trapping campaigns conducted in 17 counties from 2005 to 2011 in Texas, USA, compare capture rates by demographic category between side-swing and rooter gates, and evaluate influences of moisture, using the Palmer Drought Severity Index (PDSI), on juvenile capture rates. We trapped feral swine during all months of the year. Our trap configurations were identical with the exception of gate style. Traps had either side-swing or rooter gates. We captured 1,310 feral swine during 2,424 trap-nights. We found no differences in capture rates between gate styles for adults, adult males, or adult females. However, we found juvenile capture rates and total capture rates to differ between gate styles. Box traps with rooter gates captured more juveniles, resulting in more total captures than in box traps with side-swing gates. Partitioned rooter gates are constructed to allow for continual entry after the gate has been tripped; whereas with single-panel side-swine gates, continual entry may be more challenging for juvenile animals that lack the size and strength to push through the spring tension. Rooter gates should be considered over side-swing gates in management programs aimed at overall damage reduction. However, in management or research programs that seek to capture adult feral swine, side-swing gates may be more appropriate because fewer non-target juvenile feral swine are captured

Rodent damage to rice crops is not affected by the water‑saving technique, alternate wetting and drying

Rice farmers in Southeast Asia are hesitant to adopt the water-saving technology, alternate wetting and drying (AWD), for fear the practice will lead to increased rodent pest activity, consequently exacerbating yield loss. We examined the effects of AWD on the population dynamics, habitat use and damage levels inflicted on rice crops by the most important rodent pest of rice in Indonesia and the Philippines, Rattus argentiventer and R. tanezumi, respectively. Rice crop damage levels were not affected by the water management scheme employed. Rodent activity in rice fields was not influenced by water level. Both species tended to use the rice paddies over bunds regardless of water level, indicating that something other than water affects their habitat use, and we argue it is likely that the perceived risk of predation is the primary factor driving habitat use. Activity levels and damage inflicted by rodent pests on rice were not correlated. AWD had no effect on breeding and population dynamics of these species. Breeding of R. argentiventer is tied to the growth stages of rice, while available resource dictates breeding by R. tanezumi. Our findings clearly indicate that rice farmers in both Indonesia and the Philippines have no cause to reject AWD based on concerns that AWD would exacerbate crop losses by rodents. Given AWD is being promoted as a climate-smart technology for rice production in Asia and Africa, we strongly recommend its adoption without concerns that it would aggravate rodent pest impacts in lowland irrigated rice cropping systems