Skip to main content

Rabbits and hares a conservation nightmare?

Throughout history, humans have deliberately translocated rabbits and hares (leporids) around the world, so they now occupy every continent, with the exception of Antarctica.

But our bunnies are not always lovable, at least not from a conservationist viewpoint.  They can be a pest, creating economic and ecological mayhem.

A new Mammal Review article examines studies on the twelve leporid species that have been introduced by humans to areas beyond their native ranges, highlighting the effects on the ecosystem at different levels.

Rabbits and Hares breed fast

One thing is certain about rabbits. Rabbits breed like rabbits, and that means fast!

Most leporids have multiple litters per year with litter sizes varying from 1 to 11 individuals, and each female produces between 10 and 45 young per year.  This makes them resilient to predation, and enables them to adapt rapidly to environmental change.  They can also rapidly colonise a range of environments.

Thus, measures to eradicate invasive leporid species usually end in failure.  Their impact on the ecosystem is deep and far reaching. They literally dig in.


Photo credit: Gonzalo Ignazi

Impact on nutrition and landscape

Rabbits and hares can affect their surroundings by chemically and physically changing their environment and landscape, and profoundly affecting soil nutrient availability. 

The authors of the review note that leporids can provide food resources to predators, modify nutrient availability and soil structure, compete with native herbivores, consume crops, and have other major impacts, all of which affect other native species.

In exotic locations their impact can be detrimental

In their native ranges, leporids are widely known to benefit plant community richness, composition, and succession.  But, in exotic locations their effects can be detrimental. 

In their native range, leporids commonly compete with several other mammal species, whilst in their exotic locations they put pressure on native herbivores.  The native species have little time to adapt to the changes made by the invaders. 

Conservation strategies

For all these reasons, the authors suggest conservation biologists should carefully consider the effects of leporids when planning management strategies that include these species.

Researcher and co-author of the report Dr. Facundo Barbar, of Universidad Nacional del Comahue, in Argentina says:

“Although conservation issues and economic costs produced by rabbit introductions around the world are well known, there is a lack of systematic information about this regarding their closest relatives."

Hares and rabbits share some biological traits which could make them successful invaders and profoundly change the invaded regions. Perhaps one of the most notorious effects (among the many that they produce), is that they constitute a new and abundant food resource to a wide variety of predators, ultimately changing biological communities.
He goes on to conclude:
Considering all introduced leporid species and their many effects on the ecosystems is crucial at the time of planning conservation strategies.

If you like this article, please help us by subscribing and getting the latest updates.


Subscribe to The Thin End

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Prioritising people in nursing care.

There has been in recent years concern that care in the NHS has not been sufficiently 'patient centred', or responsive to the needs of the patient on a case basis. It has been felt in care that it as been the patient who has had to adapt to the regime of care, rather than the other way around. Putting patients at the centre of care means being responsive to their needs and supporting them through the process of health care delivery.  Patients should not become identikit sausages in a production line. The nurses body, the Nursing and Midwifery Council has responded to this challenge with a revised code of practice reflection get changes in health and social care since the previous code was published in 2008. The Code describes the professional standards of practice and behaviour for nurses and midwives. Four themes describe what nurses and midwives are expected to do: prioritise people practise effectively preserve safety, and promote professionalism and trust. The

Ian Duncan-Smith says he wants to make those on benefits 'better people'!

By any account, the government's austerity strategy is utilitarian. It justifies its approach by the presumed potential ends. It's objective is to cut the deficit, but it has also adopted another objective which is specifically targeted. It seeks to drive people off benefits and 'back to work'.  The two together are toxic to the poorest in society. Those least able to cope are the most affected by the cuts in benefits and the loss of services. It is the coupling of these two strategic aims that make their policies ethically questionable. For, by combining the two, slashing the value of benefits to make budget savings while also changing the benefits system, the highest burden falls on a specific group, those dependent on benefits. For the greater good of the majority, a minority group, those on benefits, are being sacrificed; sacrificed on the altar of austerity. And they are being sacrificed in part so that others may be spared. Utilitarian ethics considers the ba

When Finance Drives Destruction

Tackling climate change means stopping the funding of rainforest destruction, says a significant study commissioned by the World Wildlife Fund.  The UK's financial services have provided directly over £8.7 billion to 167 different traders, processors, and buyers of forest-risk commodities (cocoa, rubber, timber, soy, beef, palm oil, pulp & paper) from 2013 to 2021.   With direct and indirect investment,  the figure rises to a staggering £200 bn.  Whilst not all that investment is in destructive projects,  the study concludes there is little transparency on the risk.  Finance is the oil in the economic machine.  But it also drives decisions. We all know the importance of money. We borrow to invest. So much depends on it, such as company pensions.  Do we really know what our pension pots are doing? We invest for the future. But what kind of future? Is all investment good?  Much investment is bad. Investment drives the nature of our economy. It drives our decisions as individuals,