Abstract The ecological effects on populations of non‐game species driven by the annual release and management of tens of millions of gamebirds for recreational shooting are complex and relatively poorly… Click to show full abstract
Abstract The ecological effects on populations of non‐game species driven by the annual release and management of tens of millions of gamebirds for recreational shooting are complex and relatively poorly understood. We investigated these effects at a national scale, considering multiple taxa simultaneously. We used records from the UK National Biodiversity Network Atlas to compare animal species and diversity metrics previously suggested to be affected by behaviors of the released birds, or because resources or habitats are influenced by game management or both processes. We contrasted records from 1 km grid squares where gamebirds were reported released in Great Britain, and control squares with similar land cover but where no releases were reported. There were more records overall reported from release grid squares (RGS) compared with controls (CGS), perhaps due to greater reporting effort or greater biological richness. We found fewer foxes in RGS and fewest in grid squares with largest releases, but more carrion crows in RGS. We found no consistent effects for buzzards, ravens, jays, or magpies. There were more rodents and gray squirrels reported from RGS but no differences for reptiles. There were more butterflies but fewer beetles reported from RGS but no consistent patterns for Orthoptera or ground beetles considered common gamebird prey. Farmland and woodland birds exhibited higher abundance, richness, and diversity in RGS when considering absolute records, but woodland bird abundance and richness were lower when correcting for the relative number of records. These nationwide results, despite crude data resolution, reveal diverse effects of gamebird release and management at a national scale and across trophic levels, increasing some non‐game animal populations while decreasing others. This should alert practitioners, opponents, and legislators that a focus on single taxa effects, either positive or negative, may obscure the simultaneous changes in other taxa.
               
Click one of the above tabs to view related content.