A Critical Look at Wild Pig Elimination: Myths and Facts

Authors

Kim M. Pepin, USDA APHIS WS NWRCFollow
Travis L. Guerrant, USDA APHIS WSFollow
Jeremiah L. Psiropoulos, USDA APHIS WS, National Feral Swine Damage Management ProgramFollow
Jeanine T. Neskey, USDA APHIS WS, National Feral Swine Damage Management ProgramFollow
John M. Tomeček, Texas A&M UniversityFollow
Michael J. Bodenchuk, USDA APHIS WS, Cooperative Wildlife Services ProgramFollow
Janean L. Romines, USDA APHIS WS, National Feral Swine Damage Management ProgramFollow

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

Abstract

Wild pigs (Sus scrofa) are abundant and widely distributed in the United States. They damage crops and pastures, predate livestock and sensitive species, impact ecosystem functions, and damage personal property. To address these issues, some states in the United States are seeking complete elimination. A frequently asked question by stakeholders is: “What portion of the population needs to be removed annually to reach elimination?” The number 70% is widely touted as the answer. There is little scientific evidence to support that this percent annual removal would be needed to achieve elimination, yet 70% has now become a standard measure of management success, and in some cases the rationale for support or lack thereof for operational management programs. For example, some stakeholders believe that if a wild pig elimination program does not remove 70% of the population annually across the state, then it is not being effective. These strong and widespread anecdotal beliefs may actually impede management progress. Herein, we describe the likely origin of the 70% parameter and the science to support why this metric measuring success of an elimination program is inaccurate.

Recommended Citation

Pepin, Kim M.; Guerrant, Travis L.; Psiropoulos, Jeremiah L.; Neskey, Jeanine T.; Tomeček, John M.; Bodenchuk, Michael J.; and Romines, Janean L. (2023) "A Critical Look at Wild Pig Elimination: Myths and Facts," Human–Wildlife Interactions: Vol. 17: Iss. 1, Article 12.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.26077/5697-41d2
Available at: https://digitalcommons.usu.edu/hwi/vol17/iss1/12