<?xml version='1.0' encoding='utf-8'?>
<oai_dc:dc xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:oai_dc="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/ http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc.xsd">
  <dc:contributor>Harold A. Doty</dc:contributor>
  <dc:contributor>D.E. Sharp</dc:contributor>
  <dc:contributor>J.E. Neaville</dc:contributor>
  <dc:creator>J. T. Lokemoen</dc:creator>
  <dc:date>1982</dc:date>
  <dc:description>We evaluated electric fences as predator barriers to reduce high losses of waterfowl nests to mammalian predation at Waterfowl Production Areas (WPAs). The work was done in 1978-81 on 3 paired sites in central North Dakota and western Minnesota. Resident mammalian predators were trapped from inside the exclosures. All 3 fences operated during the study period with few major maintenance problems. Nest success in the exclosures was 65% in North Dakota and 55% in Minnesota vs. 45 and 12% in the respective controls. Cover inside the electric fence produced 7.8 more young/ha than cover in control plots in North Dakota during the 3 years. Cover inside the 2 electric fences in Minnesota yielded 9.5 and 4.3 more young/ha than cover in control plots during the 3 years. Using construction costs only we estimated that each additional duckling produced in cover protected by electric fencing cost $0.65 in North Dakota and $0.87 in Minnesota.</dc:description>
  <dc:format>application/pdf</dc:format>
  <dc:language>en</dc:language>
  <dc:publisher>U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service</dc:publisher>
  <dc:title>Electric fences to reduce mammalian predation on waterfowl nests</dc:title>
  <dc:type>article</dc:type>
</oai_dc:dc>