Removing cats to protect birds backfires on island

[Mr. DS]

Maybe we should call the sea kittens in next to help...
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090113/ap_on_re_au_an/as_australia_rabbit_infestation

[meQal]

Just send the Thai government several copies of "Night of the Lepus" as a primer on what not to do.

[Jack]

The unintended consequences of the cat-removal project show the dangers of meddling with an ecosystem — even with the best of intentions — without thinking long and hard, the study said.

Yeah, you'd really need to think "long and hard" to figure out that removing predators will drastically increase the population of ALL the prey animals, not just the one they intended.  Jeez, you'd have to be a world renowned genius to figure something like that out 

[InformationGeek]

I saw this article and shook my head.  You just can't remove a species of animal from an ecosystem without something going wrong.

[Raffine]

Tasmania was pretty proud of itself when they managed to kill off all the thylacines, their native 'apex predator', early in the 20th century.

Serves 'em right.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thylacine

[Captain Tars Tarkas]

I saw this article and shook my head.  You just can't remove a species of animal from an ecosystem without something going wrong.

No, the problem, as mentioned in the article, is that they only removed one of the invasive species instead of all of them.  The feral cats are not native inhabitants of the island, neither are the rabbits.  Invasive species on islands can be especially destructive due to the natural ecology of island ecosystems.  Invasives can generally outcompete native species, play havok with ecosystems, displace seabird populations, and do all sorts of nasty things.  Dangerous invasive species include cats, pigs, goats, and rats, all of which cause different problems.  Cats prey on native sea birds and land mammals; pigs destroy vegetation and native species nests (birds and turtles); goats literally strip all vegetation off of an island; and rats also destroy eggs of native birds, as well as attack young birds and sick adults.

Island Conservation has done invasive eradication many times and is highly successful:  http://www.islandconservation.org/index.php
The decision to not eliminate rabbits is especially head scratching due to the island's close proximity to Australia, which has its own invasive rabbits problem.  The time the work was done was over a decade ago, and I doubt they would go about it the same way if it was done today.

[ghouck]

I read somewhere that a group of people researched EVERY animal and vegetable transplant known to man and not a single one did not either die off or proliferate rampantly. None. Neither intentional nor accidental transplant. Heck Wikipedia's featured picture today by chance has an example of a bird that has been transplanted and is not hybridizing an endangered species. One way or another, it never works well. They estimate the overall cost of those little muscles that have been accidentally transplanted into the Great Lakes to be near a trillion dollars already.

[Ed, Ego and Superego]

It was the introduction of rabbits that boogered the whole thing up.  Pity we have learned ecology as an on-the-job basis, as a species.  HErres a great note from teh Wiki on the subject:
"The current infestation appears to have originated with the release of 24 wild rabbits by Thomas Austin on his property, Barwon Park, near Winchelsea, Victoria, in October 1859 for hunting purposes. While living in England, Austin had been an avid hunter, regularly dedicating his weekends to rabbit shooting. Upon arriving in Australia, which had no native rabbit population, Austin asked his nephew in England to send him 24 grey rabbits, five hares, 72 partridges and some sparrows so that he could continue his hobby in Australia by creating a local population of the species. Many other farms released their rabbits into the wild after Austin. At the time he had stated, "The introduction of a few rabbits could do little harm and might provide a touch of home, in addition to a spot of hunting."[5]"

Did they not have the phrase "breed like rabbits" back then?




=Ed

[Torgo]

It always seems to happen like this. They don't think through a problem enough before implementing a haphazard solution that seems rational at the time.

[meQal]

It was the introduction of rabbits that boogered the whole thing up.  Pity we have learned ecology as an on-the-job basis, as a species.  HErres a great note from teh Wiki on the subject:
"The current infestation appears to have originated with the release of 24 wild rabbits by Thomas Austin on his property, Barwon Park, near Winchelsea, Victoria, in October 1859 for hunting purposes. While living in England, Austin had been an avid hunter, regularly dedicating his weekends to rabbit shooting. Upon arriving in Australia, which had no native rabbit population, Austin asked his nephew in England to send him 24 grey rabbits, five hares, 72 partridges and some sparrows so that he could continue his hobby in Australia by creating a local population of the species. Many other farms released their rabbits into the wild after Austin. At the time he had stated, "The introduction of a few rabbits could do little harm and might provide a touch of home, in addition to a spot of hunting."[5]"

Did they not have the phrase "breed like rabbits" back then?

Another good example is the introduction of Kudzu tot he Southeastern United States. Kudzu was brought over from Japan as early as the 1870's but was pushed as a form of soil concervation starting in 1935 until the early 1950's. Well it conserved soil alright. It made it where you can't even get to the soil or grow anything else.