Assessing target and non-target species interactions with buried non-toxic meat baits across fire mosaics

Context Lethal 1080 baiting to control invasive predators, or to reduce livestock predation by canids, is a widespread management tool used throughout Australia and New Zealand. Techniques to reduce the impact of 1080 baiting on non-target species exist, but their efficacy, including effects of environmental variation and disturbance on baiting outcomes, remains poorly understood. Aims We aimed to experimentally quantify the extent to which target and non-target species dig up and consume buried baits, and to examine how habitat variation and fire affect such interactions. Methods Remote cameras were deployed for 70 days to monitor the fate of non-toxic baits in the semi-arid Big Desert-Wyperfeld region of southeastern Australia. Species digging up or eating baits (collectively ‘bait interactions’) were identified, and the effects of environmental factors on bait interaction rates were assessed. Key results Non-target species accounted for 128 (88%) of 146 total bait interactions, primarily native mice species. Target species interacted with fewer baits and took longer to record bait interactions, with foxes (Vulpes vulpes) averaging 41 days for 17 bait interactions and one dingo (Canis familiaris/Canis dingo) taking 60 days, whereas native mice interactions occurred after ~13 days. At sites where foxes and dingoes were detected, both target species almost always interacted with baits (83%), whereas non-target species interacted with baits at less than half of the sites they were detected (42%). Areas with greater variation in fire frequency (pyrodiversity) and mid-successional vegetation were associated with more native mice-bait interactions. Conclusions Non-target species interacted with baits more often and sooner than target species, suggesting efforts to reduce predator populations could have inadvertent effects on other species. The influence of fire and vegetation variables on bait interaction rates also highlights the importance of accounting for landscape features when designing lethal control programs. Implications Predator control can benefit native wildlife, and help to reduce livestock loss; however, managers must account for environmental factors that may influence which species are most likely to be affected by toxic baits, and by extension possible broader impacts on ecosystems. Monitoring to assess baiting outcomes and limit the negative consequences for non-target species constitutes best practice.