Foxes and foxhunting on farms in Wiltshire: a case study
Identifieur interne : 001227 ( Istex/Corpus ); précédent : 001226; suivant : 001228Foxes and foxhunting on farms in Wiltshire: a case study
Auteurs : Sandra E. Baker ; David W. MacdonaldSource :
- Journal of Rural Studies [ 0743-0167 ] ; 2000.
Abstract
A questionnaire survey of 220 farmers, and interviews with 13 Masters of packs of foxhounds, in the county of Wiltshire, UK, were undertaken to answer questions on whether farmers perceived the red fox, Vulpes vulpes, to be a pest, and on pest control methods. Farmers’ opinions regarding the need for fox control were often contradictory and not directly governed by their own interests. Although two-thirds did not consider the fox to be a personal pest, most believed that foxes should be controlled everywhere, because they were too numerous. Far fewer believed foxes responsible for actually taking domestic livestock. Where farmers’ opinions of the fox were influenced by personal stock loss, their main concern was chickens, which were generally kept on a non-commercial scale. The evidence is that, over the whole county, hunting with hounds makes an insignificant contribution (5%) to total mortality (through `control efforts'), most being shot. A greater density of foxes was reported shot when there was a perceived pest problem, where lamb or gamebird losses were reported, or when a farmer farmed stock. Where the farmer considered shooting to be effective or humane, a greater density of foxes was also shot. The Hunt was less responsive to these situations, paying fewer visits to farms where the fox was considered a pest, or where the farmer welcomed the Hunt, hunting being more likely to occur on farms reporting fewer foxes, less livestock farming and fewer fox pest problems. It is likely that these farms presented fewer incompatibilities with, or physical access problems for, the Hunt. Most farmers, even on farms where foxes were considered a pest, tolerated, rather than encouraged, hunting on their land. Evidence from hunting farmers suggests that hunting is considered primarily as recreation, and secondarily as a method of controlling foxes.
Url:
DOI: 10.1016/S0743-0167(99)00051-0
Links to Exploration step
ISTEX:59B324B4DAB40B919BF6CAD20AC0E7B22DF168D1Le document en format XML
<record><TEI wicri:istexFullTextTei="biblStruct"><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title>Foxes and foxhunting on farms in Wiltshire: a case study</title><author><name sortKey="Baker, Sandra E" sort="Baker, Sandra E" uniqKey="Baker S" first="Sandra E." last="Baker">Sandra E. Baker</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Wildlife Conservation Research Unit, Department of Zoology, University of Oxford, South Parks Road, Oxford OX1 3PS, UK</mods:affiliation></affiliation><affiliation><mods:affiliation>E-mail: sandra.baker@zoology.oxford.ac.uk</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Macdonald, David W" sort="Macdonald, David W" uniqKey="Macdonald D" first="David W." last="Macdonald">David W. Macdonald</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Wildlife Conservation Research Unit, Department of Zoology, University of Oxford, South Parks Road, Oxford OX1 3PS, UK</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author></titleStmt><publicationStmt><idno type="wicri:source">ISTEX</idno><idno type="RBID">ISTEX:59B324B4DAB40B919BF6CAD20AC0E7B22DF168D1</idno><date when="2000" year="2000">2000</date><idno type="doi">10.1016/S0743-0167(99)00051-0</idno><idno type="url">https://api.istex.fr/document/59B324B4DAB40B919BF6CAD20AC0E7B22DF168D1/fulltext/pdf</idno><idno type="wicri:Area/Istex/Corpus">001227</idno><idno type="wicri:explorRef" wicri:stream="Istex" wicri:step="Corpus" wicri:corpus="ISTEX">001227</idno></publicationStmt><sourceDesc><biblStruct><analytic><title level="a">Foxes and foxhunting on farms in Wiltshire: a case study</title><author><name sortKey="Baker, Sandra E" sort="Baker, Sandra E" uniqKey="Baker S" first="Sandra E." last="Baker">Sandra E. Baker</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Wildlife Conservation Research Unit, Department of Zoology, University of Oxford, South Parks Road, Oxford OX1 3PS, UK</mods:affiliation></affiliation><affiliation><mods:affiliation>E-mail: sandra.baker@zoology.oxford.ac.uk</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Macdonald, David W" sort="Macdonald, David W" uniqKey="Macdonald D" first="David W." last="Macdonald">David W. Macdonald</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Wildlife Conservation Research Unit, Department of Zoology, University of Oxford, South Parks Road, Oxford OX1 3PS, UK</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author></analytic><monogr></monogr><series><title level="j">Journal of Rural Studies</title><title level="j" type="abbrev">RUST</title><idno type="ISSN">0743-0167</idno><imprint><publisher>ELSEVIER</publisher><date type="published" when="2000">2000</date><biblScope unit="volume">16</biblScope><biblScope unit="issue">2</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" from="185">185</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" to="201">201</biblScope></imprint><idno type="ISSN">0743-0167</idno></series><idno type="istex">59B324B4DAB40B919BF6CAD20AC0E7B22DF168D1</idno><idno type="DOI">10.1016/S0743-0167(99)00051-0</idno><idno type="PII">S0743-0167(99)00051-0</idno></biblStruct></sourceDesc><seriesStmt><idno type="ISSN">0743-0167</idno></seriesStmt></fileDesc><profileDesc><textClass></textClass><langUsage><language ident="en">en</language></langUsage></profileDesc></teiHeader><front><div type="abstract" xml:lang="en">A questionnaire survey of 220 farmers, and interviews with 13 Masters of packs of foxhounds, in the county of Wiltshire, UK, were undertaken to answer questions on whether farmers perceived the red fox, Vulpes vulpes, to be a pest, and on pest control methods. Farmers’ opinions regarding the need for fox control were often contradictory and not directly governed by their own interests. Although two-thirds did not consider the fox to be a personal pest, most believed that foxes should be controlled everywhere, because they were too numerous. Far fewer believed foxes responsible for actually taking domestic livestock. Where farmers’ opinions of the fox were influenced by personal stock loss, their main concern was chickens, which were generally kept on a non-commercial scale. The evidence is that, over the whole county, hunting with hounds makes an insignificant contribution (5%) to total mortality (through `control efforts'), most being shot. A greater density of foxes was reported shot when there was a perceived pest problem, where lamb or gamebird losses were reported, or when a farmer farmed stock. Where the farmer considered shooting to be effective or humane, a greater density of foxes was also shot. The Hunt was less responsive to these situations, paying fewer visits to farms where the fox was considered a pest, or where the farmer welcomed the Hunt, hunting being more likely to occur on farms reporting fewer foxes, less livestock farming and fewer fox pest problems. It is likely that these farms presented fewer incompatibilities with, or physical access problems for, the Hunt. Most farmers, even on farms where foxes were considered a pest, tolerated, rather than encouraged, hunting on their land. Evidence from hunting farmers suggests that hunting is considered primarily as recreation, and secondarily as a method of controlling foxes.</div></front></TEI><istex><corpusName>elsevier</corpusName><author><json:item><name>Sandra E. Baker</name><affiliations><json:string>Wildlife Conservation Research Unit, Department of Zoology, University of Oxford, South Parks Road, Oxford OX1 3PS, UK</json:string><json:string>E-mail: sandra.baker@zoology.oxford.ac.uk</json:string></affiliations></json:item><json:item><name>David W. Macdonald</name><affiliations><json:string>Wildlife Conservation Research Unit, Department of Zoology, University of Oxford, South Parks Road, Oxford OX1 3PS, UK</json:string></affiliations></json:item></author><subject><json:item><lang><json:string>eng</json:string></lang><value>Red fox</value></json:item><json:item><lang><json:string>eng</json:string></lang><value>Vulpes vulpes</value></json:item><json:item><lang><json:string>eng</json:string></lang><value>Pest</value></json:item><json:item><lang><json:string>eng</json:string></lang><value>Foxhunting</value></json:item><json:item><lang><json:string>eng</json:string></lang><value>Shooting</value></json:item><json:item><lang><json:string>eng</json:string></lang><value>Wiltshire</value></json:item></subject><language><json:string>eng</json:string></language><originalGenre><json:string>Full-length article</json:string></originalGenre><abstract>A questionnaire survey of 220 farmers, and interviews with 13 Masters of packs of foxhounds, in the county of Wiltshire, UK, were undertaken to answer questions on whether farmers perceived the red fox, Vulpes vulpes, to be a pest, and on pest control methods. Farmers’ opinions regarding the need for fox control were often contradictory and not directly governed by their own interests. Although two-thirds did not consider the fox to be a personal pest, most believed that foxes should be controlled everywhere, because they were too numerous. Far fewer believed foxes responsible for actually taking domestic livestock. Where farmers’ opinions of the fox were influenced by personal stock loss, their main concern was chickens, which were generally kept on a non-commercial scale. The evidence is that, over the whole county, hunting with hounds makes an insignificant contribution (5%) to total mortality (through `control efforts'), most being shot. A greater density of foxes was reported shot when there was a perceived pest problem, where lamb or gamebird losses were reported, or when a farmer farmed stock. Where the farmer considered shooting to be effective or humane, a greater density of foxes was also shot. The Hunt was less responsive to these situations, paying fewer visits to farms where the fox was considered a pest, or where the farmer welcomed the Hunt, hunting being more likely to occur on farms reporting fewer foxes, less livestock farming and fewer fox pest problems. It is likely that these farms presented fewer incompatibilities with, or physical access problems for, the Hunt. Most farmers, even on farms where foxes were considered a pest, tolerated, rather than encouraged, hunting on their land. Evidence from hunting farmers suggests that hunting is considered primarily as recreation, and secondarily as a method of controlling foxes.</abstract><qualityIndicators><score>8</score><pdfVersion>1.2</pdfVersion><pdfPageSize>548 x 757 pts</pdfPageSize><refBibsNative>true</refBibsNative><keywordCount>6</keywordCount><abstractCharCount>1873</abstractCharCount><pdfWordCount>11452</pdfWordCount><pdfCharCount>68189</pdfCharCount><pdfPageCount>17</pdfPageCount><abstractWordCount>296</abstractWordCount></qualityIndicators><title>Foxes and foxhunting on farms in Wiltshire: a case study</title><pii><json:string>S0743-0167(99)00051-0</json:string></pii><genre><json:string>research-article</json:string></genre><host><volume>16</volume><pii><json:string>S0743-0167(00)X0022-8</json:string></pii><pages><last>201</last><first>185</first></pages><issn><json:string>0743-0167</json:string></issn><issue>2</issue><genre><json:string>journal</json:string></genre><language><json:string>unknown</json:string></language><title>Journal of Rural Studies</title><publicationDate>2000</publicationDate></host><publicationDate>2000</publicationDate><copyrightDate>2000</copyrightDate><doi><json:string>10.1016/S0743-0167(99)00051-0</json:string></doi><id>59B324B4DAB40B919BF6CAD20AC0E7B22DF168D1</id><score>0.2507268</score><fulltext><json:item><extension>pdf</extension><original>true</original><mimetype>application/pdf</mimetype><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/59B324B4DAB40B919BF6CAD20AC0E7B22DF168D1/fulltext/pdf</uri></json:item><json:item><extension>zip</extension><original>false</original><mimetype>application/zip</mimetype><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/59B324B4DAB40B919BF6CAD20AC0E7B22DF168D1/fulltext/zip</uri></json:item><istex:fulltextTEI uri="https://api.istex.fr/document/59B324B4DAB40B919BF6CAD20AC0E7B22DF168D1/fulltext/tei"><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title level="a">Foxes and foxhunting on farms in Wiltshire: a case study</title></titleStmt><publicationStmt><authority>ISTEX</authority><publisher>ELSEVIER</publisher><availability><p>©2000 Elsevier Science Ltd</p></availability><date>2000</date></publicationStmt><notesStmt><note type="content">Fig. 1: The percentage of farmers considering the fox to be a pest, when stock was, and was not, believed to have been lost to foxes (percentage of farmers) [χ2 Tests: Gamebirds, N.S.; Lambs, P<0.001; Chickens, P<0.001].</note><note type="content">Fig. 2: The density of foxes reported shot, and killed by hunting, on different enterprises (km−2) [Bars are 1 X SE. χ2 Tests: Arable, NS; Dairy, P=0.004; Mixed, P=0.077].</note><note type="content">Fig. 3: The density of foxes reported shot, and killed by hunting, on farms where the fox was, and was not, considered a pest (source: farmers' questionnaire) and the density of foxes killed by the Hunt (source: Hunt Masters' diaries) for comparison (km−2) [Bars are 1 X SE. χ2 Tests: Density shot, P=0.003; Density hunted, NS].</note><note type="content">Fig. 4: The density of foxes reported shot, and killed by hunting, where (a) lambs, and (b) gamebirds, were, and were not reported lost to foxes (km−2) [Bars are 1 X SE. χ2 Tests: 4 (a) Foxes shot, lambs ever lost, P=0.09; Foxes shot, lambs lost in year, P=0.028; Foxes hunted, lambs ever lost, P=0.06; Foxes hunted, lambs lost in year, NS. 4. (b) Foxes shot, gamebirds ever lost, P=0.09; Foxes shot, gamebirds lost in year, P=0.09; Foxes hunted, gamebirds ever lost, P=0.04; Foxes hunted, gamebirds lost in year, NS].</note><note type="content">Fig. 5: Annual pattern of foxes reported shot, and killed by hunting (percentage of those foxes which were killed by each method which were killed in each month) [Fisher's Exact, P<0.0001].</note><note type="content">Fig. 6: The density of foxes reported shot, and killed by hunting, when farmers did and did not consider such methods to be effective or humane (km−2) [Bars are 1 X SE. χ2 Tests: Shooting effective, P=0.014; Shooting humane, P=0.018; Hunting effective, NS; Hunting humane, NS].</note><note type="content">Table 1: Mean size of farms by farmer category (hectares) (SEs), n=101</note><note type="content">Table 2: Distribution of Council and non-Council farms by enterprise category (percentage of farms), n=101</note><note type="content">Table 3: Farmers’ opinions of why foxes should be controlled (percentage of farmers who said foxes should be controlled), n=92</note><note type="content">Table 4: Relationship between farmers’ opinions of the fox as a pest, or their own perceived stock loss, and their opinions regarding where fox control is necessary (percentage of farmers), n=75</note><note type="content">Table 5: Farmers citing the fox as a pest (percentage of farmers nominating)</note><note type="content">Table 6: Farmers’ mean estimated fox litter and earth densities (km−2), and litter sizes (number of cubs) (SEs)</note><note type="content">Table 7: Proportion of gameshooting and non-shooting farms, where the fox is considered a pest (percentage of farms)</note><note type="content">Table 8: Farmers citing certain diseases and causes of infection, or death, as potentially spread by foxes (percentage of farmers), together with an indication of the likelihood of this happening</note><note type="content">Table 9: Mean density of foxes reported killed by shooting and hunting on Council and non-Council farms (km−2) (SEs).</note><note type="content">Table 10: Mean density of foxes killed by the Hunt in Wiltshire over the previous five seasons (km−2) (SEs), n=7</note><note type="content">Table 11: Farmers’ opinions of various fox control methods (percentage of farmers) n=72, except hunting and snaring, n=71</note><note type="content">Table 12: Farmers’ attitudes towards hunting on their land according to enterprise, `pest’ status, and whether gameshooting took place, or the farmer himself hunted (percentage of farmers).</note><note type="content">Table 13: Mean number of Hunt visits in the 1994/95 season according to `pest’ or `Council’ status (visits per farm) and to whether gameshooting took place, or gamebirds were lost (visits per km2) (SEs)</note></notesStmt><sourceDesc><biblStruct type="inbook"><analytic><title level="a">Foxes and foxhunting on farms in Wiltshire: a case study</title><author xml:id="author-1"><persName><forename type="first">Sandra E.</forename><surname>Baker</surname></persName><email>sandra.baker@zoology.oxford.ac.uk</email><note type="correspondence"><p>Corresponding author</p></note><affiliation>Wildlife Conservation Research Unit, Department of Zoology, University of Oxford, South Parks Road, Oxford OX1 3PS, UK</affiliation></author><author xml:id="author-2"><persName><forename type="first">David W.</forename><surname>Macdonald</surname></persName><affiliation>Wildlife Conservation Research Unit, Department of Zoology, University of Oxford, South Parks Road, Oxford OX1 3PS, UK</affiliation></author></analytic><monogr><title level="j">Journal of Rural Studies</title><title level="j" type="abbrev">RUST</title><idno type="pISSN">0743-0167</idno><idno type="PII">S0743-0167(00)X0022-8</idno><imprint><publisher>ELSEVIER</publisher><date type="published" when="2000"></date><biblScope unit="volume">16</biblScope><biblScope unit="issue">2</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" from="185">185</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" to="201">201</biblScope></imprint></monogr><idno type="istex">59B324B4DAB40B919BF6CAD20AC0E7B22DF168D1</idno><idno type="DOI">10.1016/S0743-0167(99)00051-0</idno><idno type="PII">S0743-0167(99)00051-0</idno></biblStruct></sourceDesc></fileDesc><profileDesc><creation><date>2000</date></creation><langUsage><language ident="en">en</language></langUsage><abstract xml:lang="en"><p>A questionnaire survey of 220 farmers, and interviews with 13 Masters of packs of foxhounds, in the county of Wiltshire, UK, were undertaken to answer questions on whether farmers perceived the red fox, Vulpes vulpes, to be a pest, and on pest control methods. Farmers’ opinions regarding the need for fox control were often contradictory and not directly governed by their own interests. Although two-thirds did not consider the fox to be a personal pest, most believed that foxes should be controlled everywhere, because they were too numerous. Far fewer believed foxes responsible for actually taking domestic livestock. Where farmers’ opinions of the fox were influenced by personal stock loss, their main concern was chickens, which were generally kept on a non-commercial scale. The evidence is that, over the whole county, hunting with hounds makes an insignificant contribution (5%) to total mortality (through `control efforts'), most being shot. A greater density of foxes was reported shot when there was a perceived pest problem, where lamb or gamebird losses were reported, or when a farmer farmed stock. Where the farmer considered shooting to be effective or humane, a greater density of foxes was also shot. The Hunt was less responsive to these situations, paying fewer visits to farms where the fox was considered a pest, or where the farmer welcomed the Hunt, hunting being more likely to occur on farms reporting fewer foxes, less livestock farming and fewer fox pest problems. It is likely that these farms presented fewer incompatibilities with, or physical access problems for, the Hunt. Most farmers, even on farms where foxes were considered a pest, tolerated, rather than encouraged, hunting on their land. Evidence from hunting farmers suggests that hunting is considered primarily as recreation, and secondarily as a method of controlling foxes.</p></abstract><textClass><keywords scheme="keyword"><list><head>Keywords</head><item><term>Red fox</term></item><item><term>Vulpes vulpes</term></item><item><term>Pest</term></item><item><term>Foxhunting</term></item><item><term>Shooting</term></item><item><term>Wiltshire</term></item></list></keywords></textClass></profileDesc><revisionDesc><change when="2000">Published</change></revisionDesc></teiHeader></istex:fulltextTEI><json:item><extension>txt</extension><original>false</original><mimetype>text/plain</mimetype><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/59B324B4DAB40B919BF6CAD20AC0E7B22DF168D1/fulltext/txt</uri></json:item></fulltext><metadata><istex:metadataXml wicri:clean="Elsevier, elements deleted: ce:floats; body; tail"><istex:xmlDeclaration>version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"</istex:xmlDeclaration><istex:docType PUBLIC="-//ES//DTD journal article DTD version 4.5.2//EN//XML" URI="art452.dtd" name="istex:docType"><istex:entity SYSTEM="gr1" NDATA="IMAGE" name="gr1"></istex:entity><istex:entity SYSTEM="gr2" NDATA="IMAGE" name="gr2"></istex:entity><istex:entity SYSTEM="gr3" NDATA="IMAGE" name="gr3"></istex:entity><istex:entity SYSTEM="gr4" NDATA="IMAGE" name="gr4"></istex:entity><istex:entity SYSTEM="gr5" NDATA="IMAGE" name="gr5"></istex:entity><istex:entity SYSTEM="gr6" NDATA="IMAGE" name="gr6"></istex:entity></istex:docType><istex:document><converted-article version="4.5.2" docsubtype="fla"><item-info><jid>RUST</jid><aid>387</aid><ce:pii>S0743-0167(99)00051-0</ce:pii><ce:doi>10.1016/S0743-0167(99)00051-0</ce:doi><ce:copyright type="full-transfer" year="2000">Elsevier Science Ltd</ce:copyright></item-info><head><ce:title>Foxes and foxhunting on farms in Wiltshire: a case study</ce:title><ce:author-group><ce:author><ce:given-name>Sandra E.</ce:given-name><ce:surname>Baker</ce:surname><ce:cross-ref refid="CORR1">*</ce:cross-ref><ce:e-address>sandra.baker@zoology.oxford.ac.uk</ce:e-address></ce:author><ce:author><ce:given-name>David W.</ce:given-name><ce:surname>Macdonald</ce:surname></ce:author><ce:affiliation><ce:textfn>Wildlife Conservation Research Unit, Department of Zoology, University of Oxford, South Parks Road, Oxford OX1 3PS, UK</ce:textfn></ce:affiliation><ce:correspondence id="CORR1"><ce:label>*</ce:label><ce:text>Corresponding author</ce:text></ce:correspondence></ce:author-group><ce:abstract><ce:section-title>Abstract</ce:section-title><ce:abstract-sec><ce:simple-para>A questionnaire survey of 220 farmers, and interviews with 13 Masters of packs of foxhounds, in the county of Wiltshire, UK, were undertaken to answer questions on whether farmers perceived the red fox, <ce:italic>Vulpes vulpes</ce:italic>, to be a pest, and on pest control methods. Farmers’ opinions regarding the need for fox control were often contradictory and not directly governed by their own interests. Although two-thirds did not consider the fox to be a personal pest, most believed that foxes should be controlled everywhere, because they were too numerous. Far fewer believed foxes responsible for actually taking domestic livestock. Where farmers’ opinions of the fox were influenced by personal stock loss, their main concern was chickens, which were generally kept on a non-commercial scale. The evidence is that, over the whole county, hunting with hounds makes an insignificant contribution (5%) to total mortality (through `control efforts'), most being shot. A greater density of foxes was reported shot when there was a perceived pest problem, where lamb or gamebird losses were reported, or when a farmer farmed stock. Where the farmer considered shooting to be effective or humane, a greater density of foxes was also shot. The Hunt was less responsive to these situations, paying fewer visits to farms where the fox was considered a pest, or where the farmer welcomed the Hunt, hunting being more likely to occur on farms reporting fewer foxes, less livestock farming and fewer fox pest problems. It is likely that these farms presented fewer incompatibilities with, or physical access problems for, the Hunt. Most farmers, even on farms where foxes were considered a pest, tolerated, rather than encouraged, hunting on their land. Evidence from hunting farmers suggests that hunting is considered primarily as recreation, and secondarily as a method of controlling foxes.</ce:simple-para></ce:abstract-sec></ce:abstract><ce:keywords class="keyword"><ce:section-title>Keywords</ce:section-title><ce:keyword><ce:text>Red fox</ce:text></ce:keyword><ce:keyword><ce:text><ce:italic>Vulpes vulpes</ce:italic></ce:text></ce:keyword><ce:keyword><ce:text>Pest</ce:text></ce:keyword><ce:keyword><ce:text>Foxhunting</ce:text></ce:keyword><ce:keyword><ce:text>Shooting</ce:text></ce:keyword><ce:keyword><ce:text>Wiltshire</ce:text></ce:keyword></ce:keywords></head></converted-article></istex:document></istex:metadataXml><mods version="3.6"><titleInfo><title>Foxes and foxhunting on farms in Wiltshire: a case study</title></titleInfo><titleInfo type="alternative" contentType="CDATA"><title>Foxes and foxhunting on farms in Wiltshire: a case study</title></titleInfo><name type="personal"><namePart type="given">Sandra E.</namePart><namePart type="family">Baker</namePart><affiliation>Wildlife Conservation Research Unit, Department of Zoology, University of Oxford, South Parks Road, Oxford OX1 3PS, UK</affiliation><affiliation>E-mail: sandra.baker@zoology.oxford.ac.uk</affiliation><description>Corresponding author</description><role><roleTerm type="text">author</roleTerm></role></name><name type="personal"><namePart type="given">David W.</namePart><namePart type="family">Macdonald</namePart><affiliation>Wildlife Conservation Research Unit, Department of Zoology, University of Oxford, South Parks Road, Oxford OX1 3PS, UK</affiliation><role><roleTerm type="text">author</roleTerm></role></name><typeOfResource>text</typeOfResource><genre type="research-article" displayLabel="Full-length article"></genre><originInfo><publisher>ELSEVIER</publisher><dateIssued encoding="w3cdtf">2000</dateIssued><copyrightDate encoding="w3cdtf">2000</copyrightDate></originInfo><language><languageTerm type="code" authority="iso639-2b">eng</languageTerm><languageTerm type="code" authority="rfc3066">en</languageTerm></language><physicalDescription><internetMediaType>text/html</internetMediaType></physicalDescription><abstract lang="en">A questionnaire survey of 220 farmers, and interviews with 13 Masters of packs of foxhounds, in the county of Wiltshire, UK, were undertaken to answer questions on whether farmers perceived the red fox, Vulpes vulpes, to be a pest, and on pest control methods. Farmers’ opinions regarding the need for fox control were often contradictory and not directly governed by their own interests. Although two-thirds did not consider the fox to be a personal pest, most believed that foxes should be controlled everywhere, because they were too numerous. Far fewer believed foxes responsible for actually taking domestic livestock. Where farmers’ opinions of the fox were influenced by personal stock loss, their main concern was chickens, which were generally kept on a non-commercial scale. The evidence is that, over the whole county, hunting with hounds makes an insignificant contribution (5%) to total mortality (through `control efforts'), most being shot. A greater density of foxes was reported shot when there was a perceived pest problem, where lamb or gamebird losses were reported, or when a farmer farmed stock. Where the farmer considered shooting to be effective or humane, a greater density of foxes was also shot. The Hunt was less responsive to these situations, paying fewer visits to farms where the fox was considered a pest, or where the farmer welcomed the Hunt, hunting being more likely to occur on farms reporting fewer foxes, less livestock farming and fewer fox pest problems. It is likely that these farms presented fewer incompatibilities with, or physical access problems for, the Hunt. Most farmers, even on farms where foxes were considered a pest, tolerated, rather than encouraged, hunting on their land. Evidence from hunting farmers suggests that hunting is considered primarily as recreation, and secondarily as a method of controlling foxes.</abstract><note type="content">Fig. 1: The percentage of farmers considering the fox to be a pest, when stock was, and was not, believed to have been lost to foxes (percentage of farmers) [χ2 Tests: Gamebirds, N.S.; Lambs, P<0.001; Chickens, P<0.001].</note><note type="content">Fig. 2: The density of foxes reported shot, and killed by hunting, on different enterprises (km−2) [Bars are 1 X SE. χ2 Tests: Arable, NS; Dairy, P=0.004; Mixed, P=0.077].</note><note type="content">Fig. 3: The density of foxes reported shot, and killed by hunting, on farms where the fox was, and was not, considered a pest (source: farmers' questionnaire) and the density of foxes killed by the Hunt (source: Hunt Masters' diaries) for comparison (km−2) [Bars are 1 X SE. χ2 Tests: Density shot, P=0.003; Density hunted, NS].</note><note type="content">Fig. 4: The density of foxes reported shot, and killed by hunting, where (a) lambs, and (b) gamebirds, were, and were not reported lost to foxes (km−2) [Bars are 1 X SE. χ2 Tests: 4 (a) Foxes shot, lambs ever lost, P=0.09; Foxes shot, lambs lost in year, P=0.028; Foxes hunted, lambs ever lost, P=0.06; Foxes hunted, lambs lost in year, NS. 4. (b) Foxes shot, gamebirds ever lost, P=0.09; Foxes shot, gamebirds lost in year, P=0.09; Foxes hunted, gamebirds ever lost, P=0.04; Foxes hunted, gamebirds lost in year, NS].</note><note type="content">Fig. 5: Annual pattern of foxes reported shot, and killed by hunting (percentage of those foxes which were killed by each method which were killed in each month) [Fisher's Exact, P<0.0001].</note><note type="content">Fig. 6: The density of foxes reported shot, and killed by hunting, when farmers did and did not consider such methods to be effective or humane (km−2) [Bars are 1 X SE. χ2 Tests: Shooting effective, P=0.014; Shooting humane, P=0.018; Hunting effective, NS; Hunting humane, NS].</note><note type="content">Table 1: Mean size of farms by farmer category (hectares) (SEs), n=101</note><note type="content">Table 2: Distribution of Council and non-Council farms by enterprise category (percentage of farms), n=101</note><note type="content">Table 3: Farmers’ opinions of why foxes should be controlled (percentage of farmers who said foxes should be controlled), n=92</note><note type="content">Table 4: Relationship between farmers’ opinions of the fox as a pest, or their own perceived stock loss, and their opinions regarding where fox control is necessary (percentage of farmers), n=75</note><note type="content">Table 5: Farmers citing the fox as a pest (percentage of farmers nominating)</note><note type="content">Table 6: Farmers’ mean estimated fox litter and earth densities (km−2), and litter sizes (number of cubs) (SEs)</note><note type="content">Table 7: Proportion of gameshooting and non-shooting farms, where the fox is considered a pest (percentage of farms)</note><note type="content">Table 8: Farmers citing certain diseases and causes of infection, or death, as potentially spread by foxes (percentage of farmers), together with an indication of the likelihood of this happening</note><note type="content">Table 9: Mean density of foxes reported killed by shooting and hunting on Council and non-Council farms (km−2) (SEs).</note><note type="content">Table 10: Mean density of foxes killed by the Hunt in Wiltshire over the previous five seasons (km−2) (SEs), n=7</note><note type="content">Table 11: Farmers’ opinions of various fox control methods (percentage of farmers) n=72, except hunting and snaring, n=71</note><note type="content">Table 12: Farmers’ attitudes towards hunting on their land according to enterprise, `pest’ status, and whether gameshooting took place, or the farmer himself hunted (percentage of farmers).</note><note type="content">Table 13: Mean number of Hunt visits in the 1994/95 season according to `pest’ or `Council’ status (visits per farm) and to whether gameshooting took place, or gamebirds were lost (visits per km2) (SEs)</note><subject><genre>Keywords</genre><topic>Red fox</topic><topic>Vulpes vulpes</topic><topic>Pest</topic><topic>Foxhunting</topic><topic>Shooting</topic><topic>Wiltshire</topic></subject><relatedItem type="host"><titleInfo><title>Journal of Rural Studies</title></titleInfo><titleInfo type="abbreviated"><title>RUST</title></titleInfo><genre type="journal">journal</genre><originInfo><dateIssued encoding="w3cdtf">200004</dateIssued></originInfo><identifier type="ISSN">0743-0167</identifier><identifier type="PII">S0743-0167(00)X0022-8</identifier><part><date>200004</date><detail type="volume"><number>16</number><caption>vol.</caption></detail><detail type="issue"><number>2</number><caption>no.</caption></detail><extent unit="issue pages"><start>141</start><end>268</end></extent><extent unit="pages"><start>185</start><end>201</end></extent></part></relatedItem><identifier type="istex">59B324B4DAB40B919BF6CAD20AC0E7B22DF168D1</identifier><identifier type="DOI">10.1016/S0743-0167(99)00051-0</identifier><identifier type="PII">S0743-0167(99)00051-0</identifier><accessCondition type="use and reproduction" contentType="copyright">©2000 Elsevier Science Ltd</accessCondition><recordInfo><recordContentSource>ELSEVIER</recordContentSource><recordOrigin>Elsevier Science Ltd, ©2000</recordOrigin></recordInfo></mods></metadata><serie></serie></istex></record>Pour manipuler ce document sous Unix (Dilib)
EXPLOR_STEP=$WICRI_ROOT/Wicri/Bois/explor/RenardV1/Data/Istex/Corpus
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_STEP/biblio.hfd -nk 001227 | SxmlIndent | more
Ou
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/Istex/Corpus/biblio.hfd -nk 001227 | SxmlIndent | more
Pour mettre un lien sur cette page dans le réseau Wicri
{{Explor lien
|wiki= Wicri/Bois
|area= RenardV1
|flux= Istex
|étape= Corpus
|type= RBID
|clé= ISTEX:59B324B4DAB40B919BF6CAD20AC0E7B22DF168D1
|texte= Foxes and foxhunting on farms in Wiltshire: a case study
}}
| This area was generated with Dilib version V0.6.27. |  |