Context. The translocation of southern hairy-nosed wombats (Lasiorhinus latifrons) has been suggested as a management tool to alleviate conflicts with the agricultural sector because of the damages caused by their burrowing activity. Translocation is widely used for removing problem animals from conflict areas, but its effectiveness is rarely adequately evaluated and often fails to resolve conflicts. Furthermore, translocations often result in low survival, extensive movement, and the non-establishment of translocated animals.
Aims. The present study assessed the viability of translocation as a damage-mitigation tool for L. latifrons, by examining the (1) capture success of L. latifrons, (2) survival and establishment of translocated L. latifrons, and (3) reduction of L. latifrons activity at source sites.
Methods. Thirteen L. latifrons individuals were translocated from conflict zones on agricultural properties and released on a private grazing property >60 km from capture sites. The behaviour of translocated L. latifrons individuals was monitored using GPS and/or VHF technology, and compared with that of 12 resident animals. Motion-sensor cameras monitored the source sites to determine recolonisation rates.
Key results. The capture and removal of problem individuals were time-intensive and infeasible on a large scale. Post-release mortality was not observed, although nine translocated and nine resident L. latifrons individuals went missing soon after release. Translocated (n = 4) L. latifrons displayed high site fidelity, but initially ranged further than residents (n = 6), before settling into similar behaviour patterns. Lasiorhinus latifrons activity was not reduced at the source sites, with neighbouring wombats recolonising warrens within 1–2 weeks.
Conclusions. Translocation is not a suitable human–wombat conflict mitigation tool but may prove useful for restoring declining populations.
Implications. These findings support the growing body of evidence that translocating problem animals is not suitable for resolving conflicts and alternative methods such as the use of deterrents may be more appropriate.
