No effect of a commercially used odor repellent for roe deer (Capreolus capreolus) protection during meadow harvest

Kód výsledku v IS VaVaI

<a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F00020702%3A_____%2F25%3AN0000078" target="_blank" >RIV/00020702:_____/25:N0000078 - isvavai.cz</a>

Nalezeny alternativní kódy

RIV/60460709:41320/25:102587 RIV/62156489:43410/25:43927553

Výsledek na webu

<a href="https://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/15/19/2932" target="_blank" >https://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/15/19/2932</a>

DOI - Digital Object Identifier

<a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ani15192932" target="_blank" >10.3390/ani15192932</a>

Jazyk výsledku

angličtina

Název v původním jazyce

No effect of a commercially used odor repellent for roe deer (Capreolus capreolus) protection during meadow harvest

Popis výsledku v původním jazyce

Simple Summary In the agricultural landscapes of Central Europe, hundreds of thousands of roe deer (Capreolus capreolus) fawns are killed annually during meadow harvests. To prevent this particularly unethical mortality of juveniles, wildlife managers employ various protection measures. One common method is to apply odor repellents in high-risk areas before harvest. Here, we evaluated the effect of the odor repellents on treated areas relative to controls without any measures. The abundance of fawns and adult roe deer was assessed before and after odor application using unmanned aerial vehicles equipped with thermal cameras. The results showed that roe deer numbers on treated fields did not differ from those on control meadows without repellents. The expected efficacy was not demonstrated either in the short term (i.e., in the days immediately following application) or over longer intervals of several weeks. The ineffectiveness of odor repellent for protecting roe deer during meadow harvest indicates shortcomings in current practice and underscores the need to adopt alternative methods, such as thermal-imaging drones.Abstract In Central Europe, the fawning season of roe deer (Capreolus capreolus) directly overlaps with meadow and alfalfa harvest, typically from late May to early June. During these operations, tens or more likely hundreds of thousands of fawns are mutilated by agricultural machinery. To mitigate this unethical mortality, wildlife managers often deploy odor repellents to drive roe deer individuals from high-risk fields before mowing. Therefore, we evaluated repellent efficacy in a paired design. The abundance of roe deer was quantified by drones equipped with thermal cameras before and after repellent application and then compared with untreated control meadows. Results showed high adult abundance that did not differ significantly among treatments. The highest median was paradoxically observed on meadows "after application" (8.25 ind./10 ha), followed by "not treated" meadows (7.92 ind./10 ha), and "before application" (5.72 ind./10 ha). For fawns, differences between treated and untreated plots were likewise non-significant. Their numbers increased over time after application, consistent with the peak of parturition in the second half of May. Overall, the study confirms that the tested odor repellent, when applied according to the manufacturer's protocol, did not reduce roe deer presence on meadows. This underscores the need to consider alternative approaches, such as the use of thermal-imaging drones combined with the subsequent translocation of detected fawns to safe locations.

Název v anglickém jazyce

No effect of a commercially used odor repellent for roe deer (Capreolus capreolus) protection during meadow harvest

Popis výsledku anglicky

Simple Summary In the agricultural landscapes of Central Europe, hundreds of thousands of roe deer (Capreolus capreolus) fawns are killed annually during meadow harvests. To prevent this particularly unethical mortality of juveniles, wildlife managers employ various protection measures. One common method is to apply odor repellents in high-risk areas before harvest. Here, we evaluated the effect of the odor repellents on treated areas relative to controls without any measures. The abundance of fawns and adult roe deer was assessed before and after odor application using unmanned aerial vehicles equipped with thermal cameras. The results showed that roe deer numbers on treated fields did not differ from those on control meadows without repellents. The expected efficacy was not demonstrated either in the short term (i.e., in the days immediately following application) or over longer intervals of several weeks. The ineffectiveness of odor repellent for protecting roe deer during meadow harvest indicates shortcomings in current practice and underscores the need to adopt alternative methods, such as thermal-imaging drones.Abstract In Central Europe, the fawning season of roe deer (Capreolus capreolus) directly overlaps with meadow and alfalfa harvest, typically from late May to early June. During these operations, tens or more likely hundreds of thousands of fawns are mutilated by agricultural machinery. To mitigate this unethical mortality, wildlife managers often deploy odor repellents to drive roe deer individuals from high-risk fields before mowing. Therefore, we evaluated repellent efficacy in a paired design. The abundance of roe deer was quantified by drones equipped with thermal cameras before and after repellent application and then compared with untreated control meadows. Results showed high adult abundance that did not differ significantly among treatments. The highest median was paradoxically observed on meadows "after application" (8.25 ind./10 ha), followed by "not treated" meadows (7.92 ind./10 ha), and "before application" (5.72 ind./10 ha). For fawns, differences between treated and untreated plots were likewise non-significant. Their numbers increased over time after application, consistent with the peak of parturition in the second half of May. Overall, the study confirms that the tested odor repellent, when applied according to the manufacturer's protocol, did not reduce roe deer presence on meadows. This underscores the need to consider alternative approaches, such as the use of thermal-imaging drones combined with the subsequent translocation of detected fawns to safe locations.

Druh

J_imp - Článek v periodiku v databázi Web of Science

CEP obor

—

OECD FORD obor

40102 - Forestry

Projekt

—

Návaznosti

I - Institucionalni podpora na dlouhodoby koncepcni rozvoj vyzkumne organizace

Rok uplatnění

2025

Kód důvěrnosti údajů

S - Úplné a pravdivé údaje o projektu nepodléhají ochraně podle zvláštních právních předpisů

Název periodika

Animals

ISSN

2076-2615

e-ISSN

—

Svazek periodika

15

Číslo periodika v rámci svazku

19

Stát vydavatele periodika

CH - Švýcarská konfederace

Počet stran výsledku

13

Strana od-do

2932

Kód UT WoS článku

001593402300001

EID výsledku v databázi Scopus

2-s2.0-105019202287