首页> 外文期刊>Wildlife Society Bulletin >The Effect of High-Tensile Electric Fence Designs on Big-Game and Livestock Movements
【24h】

The Effect of High-Tensile Electric Fence Designs on Big-Game and Livestock Movements

机译:高张力电子围栏设计对大型比赛和牲畜运动的影响

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
获取外文期刊封面目录资料

摘要

We used infrared-activated video cameras and direct observation to evaluate the effects of 2-wire high-tensile electric fence (2-WF), 3-wire high-tensile electric fence (3-WF), and 4-wire high-tensile electric fence (4-WF) designs on elk (Cervus elaphus), mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus), and pronghorn (Antilocapra americana) movements. In addition, high-tensile electric fences (HTEF) were tested for their effectiveness on domestic cattle (Bos taurus; 2-WF and 3-WF) and bison (Bison bison; 3-WF and 4-WF). Shock energy on the test fences ranged from 0.5–4.5 J. The wildlife species we studied were physically capable of crossing all of the fence designs. However, difficulty in crossing the fences varied between species and designs. The elk and mule deer observed were more successful (100%) at crossing the 2-WF than pronghorn (51%). Mule deer (95%) and pronghorn (91%) were more successful at crossing 4-WF than elk (59%). The majority of elk (79%), mule deer (93%), and pronghorn (97%) successfully crossed 3-WF. Electric shock did not appear to affect elk, mule deer, or pronghorn at a charge of 0.5–4.5 J, and overall <1% were shocked when interacting with HTEF. For domestic cattle, 2-WF was 99% effective in calf separation tests and 100% effective for bull separation. Bison were successfully contained by both 3-WF (100%) and 4-WF (99.8% [˜100%]). Our data suggest the 3-WF design overall was the least restrictive for elk, mule deer, and pronghorn and effectively confined domestic cattle and bison.
机译:我们使用红外激活摄像机并直接观察以评估2线高强度电围栏(2-WF),3线高强度电围栏(3-WF)和4线高强度电围栏的效果麋鹿(Cervus elaphus),m鹿(Odocoileus hemionus)和叉角羚(Antilocapra americana)运动上的电围栏(4-WF)设计。此外,还测试了高强度电围栏(HTEF)对家畜(金牛座; 2-WF和3-WF)和野牛(Bison野牛; 3-WF和4-WF)的有效性。测试围栏的冲击能量范围为0.5–4.5J。我们研究的野生动植物在物理上能够穿越所有围栏设计。但是,越过栅栏的难度因物种和设计而异。观察到的麋鹿和m鹿在通过2-WF时比叉角羚(51%)更成功(100%)。 crossing鹿(95%)和叉角羚(91%)在横渡4-WF方面比麋鹿(59%)更成功。大部分麋鹿(79%),ule鹿(93%)和叉角羚(97%)成功越过3-WF。电击似乎不会影响麋鹿,m鹿或叉角羚,其电荷为0.5–4.5 J,当与HTEF相互作用时,整体<1%被电击。对于家养牛,2-WF在犊牛分离试验中有99%有效,在公牛分离方面有100%有效。 3-WF(100%)和4-WF(99.8%[〜100%])都成功地容纳了野牛。我们的数据表明,3-WF设计总体上对麋鹿,m鹿和叉角羚的限制最小,有效地限制了家养牛和野牛。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号