Yong Zhi Foo, Daniel W.A. Noble, Patrick Leo Taggart

Lethal, toxic baiting has been widely adopted for the control of canines and felines. However, high variability in findings make it difficult to gauge the overall efficacy of this control method across studies. We conducted a meta-analysis of the efficacy of lethal baiting for the feral cat, red fox and dingo; our outcome of interest was apparent predator survival. Our dataset contained 121 effects from 34 studies, comprising 1402 individuals tested. When baits were distributed along tracks they increased the risk of predator death by 46% relative to controls. However, when baits were distributed more broadly across areas the risk of predator death was comparable between baited and unbaited areas. We found no evidence that baiting was more effective at reducing canine relative to feline populations. We additionally found no evidence that Eradicat® achieved greater cat death than other baits. Higher bait densities achieved a greater risk of predator death when baits were distributed along tracks, but not when baits were distributed across areas. We found no evidence that repeat bait applications over short periods of time achieve a greater risk of predator death than single bait applications; this was consistent across both design types. Similarly, we found no evidence for an effect of bait matrix (fresh meat, dry processed bait, mixture) for either design type. Our study shows that many accepted baiting practices have little empirical support and are premature given the available sparse evidence. Further, rigorous research is of high priority in this field.