EVALUATION OF THE BIONIC® TRAP TO QUICKLY KILL MINK (MUSTELA VISON) IN SIMULATED NATURAL ENVIRONMENTS Author(s): Gilbert Proulx, and Morley W. Barrett Source: Journal of Wildlife Diseases, 27(2):276-280. Published By: Wildlife Disease Association DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.7589/0090-3558-27.2.276 URL: http://www.bioone.org/doi/full/10.7589/0090-3558-27.2.276

BioOne (www.bioone.org) is a nonprofit, online aggregation of core research in the biological, ecological, and environmental sciences. BioOne provides a sustainable online platform for over 170 journals and books published by nonprofit societies, associations, museums, institutions, and presses. Your use of this PDF, the BioOne Web site, and all posted and associated content indicates your acceptance of BioOne’s Terms of Use, available at www.bioone.org/page/terms_of_use. Usage of BioOne content is strictly limited to personal, educational, and non-commercial use. Commercial inquiries or rights and permissions requests should be directed to the individual publisher as copyright holder.

BioOne sees sustainable scholarly publishing as an inherently collaborative enterprise connecting authors, nonprofit publishers, academic institutions, research libraries, and research funders in the common goal of maximizing access to critical research.

of Wildlife

Journal

Diseases,

27(2),

© Wildlife

EVALUATION

OF THE

(MUSTELA

VISON)

IN SIMULATED

Gilbert Proulx12 and Morley 1

Humane

Trapping

Program,

ABSTRACT:

The

successfully

killed

average

times

(±55)

sec,

BIONIC#{174}TRAP

W.

Alberta

Bionic#{174}trap, nine

of

TO QUICKLY

NATURAL

Centre,

with

a bait

wild

mink

placed (Mustela heartbeat

nine

to loss of consciousness

and

Bag

4000,

ENVIRONMENTS

Vegreville,

confirmed in 3 mm

to 1981,

1973

Canada types

for

received of which

as offering 1988).

the

Federal

Provin-

“humane

potential” many

The

Trapping

348 ideas or trap 16 were eventually

However,

that

MATERIAL

Humane

of

protojudged at.,

were

sub-

study

the

Bionic

trap

can

be

mousetrap,

ex-

AND METHODS

conducted in spring 1988, in m test enclosures landscaped with natural vegetation and kept under surveillance with remote control videocameras. The research facilities and equipment, and the husbandry procedures, were detailed by Proutx et 12.2

in

(Barrett them

4L0

TOB

(P 79% of mink on traptines if, during the kill and performance confirmation tests, it rendered nine of nine (0 failure), or 13 of 14 (1 failure), or 18 of 20 (2 failures) mink irreversibly unconscious in 3 mm. In the kill tests, upon firing of the trap, researchers ran to the test enclosure to monitor the state of consciousness of the mink. Animals were necropsied by a veterinary pathologist at

nomial animals

successful

would behind

were

but

unconsciousness

was determined by loss of corneat and palpebral reflexes (Walker, 1979; Horton, 1980; Rowselt et at., 1981) with inevitable death (loss of cardiac activity determined with a stethoscope). Finally, in order to be 95% confident that the Bionic#{174} trap could be expected to effectively kilt >79%

(performance

in six

all animals or slightly the skull.

cm

the back this re-

mink and

sustained

damage

(Table

for The

determined averaged that the render bly

the

1). The

of consciousness sec.

multiple to

for

loss

skull

central

average nine

time

animals

to loss was

79%

unconscious

of captured in

3

mink mm

(P

irreversi