TOO MANY DEER can contribute to animal-vehicle collisions, spread tick-borne diseases, decimate ornamental plants, and cause extensive damage to agricultural crops.
TOO MANY HORSES can compact soils, increase erosion, decrease plant cover, compete with native animals over resources, and be associated with loss of biodiversity.
In the U.S., the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) manages free-roaming equids by removing animals from the range and occasionally applying fertility control measures. The majority of horses (Equus caballus) that are removed are sent to long-term holding facilities. The BLM off-range population currently includes nearly 62,000 horses and burros and cost $108.5 million USD in FY2023 to maintain. On-range equid numbers were estimated in March 2023 to be approximately 82,883 (68,928 horses and 13,955 burros), which is three times more than the mandated appropriate management level. These populations can grow at a rate of 20%+ annually!
Several other trials with SpayVac in horses are ongoing and will help us determine the best injection site, ideal antigen dose, and test efficacy in feral, free-ranging populations.
TOO MANY ELEPHANTS living near people can destroy crops, raid food stores, damage infrastructure, and cause injury and loss of human life.
A trial with Asian elephants (Elephas maximus) will soon get underway to test contraceptive efficacy of a single SpayVac-pZP vaccination in both captive and free-ranging animals.
TOO MANY SEALS can negatively impact the dynamics of marine fish populations.
Unlike other contraceptive vaccines, SpayVac is effective for multiple years with just a single injection.
FARMED FISH (Oncorhynchus mykiss) that escape and breed with their wild counterparts may produce offspring that are less suited to surviving in the wild, and as females mature, they put the majority of their energy into egg production.
SEVERAL TRIALS WITH SPAYVAC IN WILD HORSES ARE ONGOING OR PLANNED.
Macaques can spread diseases to humans, steal belongings, and damage property, agriculture, and native vegetation. Macaques are considered to be an invasive species in some parts of the world, including Florida and South Carolina.
As free-ranging Asian elephant (Elephas maximus) populations become increasingly confined to smaller ranges, concerns grow about human-elephant conflict and its negative impact on flora and fauna. A trial with Asian elephants in Thailand is now underway to test contraceptive efficacy with a single SpayVac-pZP vaccination in both captive and free-ranging animals.
Overviews
1. Fertility control options for management of free-roaming horse populations. Bechert U, Turner Jr, J, Baker D, Eckery D, Bruemmer J, Lyman C, Prado T, King S, Fraker M. 2022. Human-Wildlife Interactions 16(2):1-38.
2. Twenty years of SpayVac® research: Potential for regulating feral horse and burro populations in the U.S. Bechert U, Fraker M. 2018. Human Wildlife Interactions 12(1):117-130.
Feral Horses
3. IgG4/7 responses correlate with contraception in mares vaccinated with SpayVac. Bechert U, Rohde J, Freer H, Wagner B. 2018. Theriogenology 121:168-174.
4. Efficacy of SpayVac® as a contraceptive in feral horses. Roelle JE, Germaine SS, Kane AJ, Cade BS. 2017. Wildlife Society Bulletin 41(1):107-115.
5. Effects of two porcine zona pellucida immunocontraceptive vaccines on ovarian activity in horses. Bechert U, Bartell J, Kutzler M, Menino Jr, A, Bildfell R, Anderson M, Fraker M. 2013. Journal of Wildlife Management 77(7):1386-1400.
6. Four-year contraception rates of mares treated with single-injections porcine zona pellucida and GnRH vaccines and intrauterine devices. Killian G, Thain D, Diehl N, Rhyan J, Miller L. 2008. Wildlife Research 35(6):531-539.
7. Achieving population goals in a long-lived wildlife species (Equus caballus) with contraception. Kirkpatrick JF, Turner A. 2008. Wildlife Research 35:513-519.
8. Immunocontraception and increased longevity in equids. Kirkpatrick FJ, Turner A. 2007. Zoo Biology 26(4):237-44.
Deer
9. Effectiveness of SpayVac® for reducing white-tailed deer fertility. Locke SL, Cook MW, Harveson LA, Davis DS, Lopez RR, Silvy NJ, Fraker MA. 2007. Journal of Wildlife Diseases 43(4):726-730.
10. Effects of SpayVac® on urban female white-tailed deer movements. Hernandez S, Locke SL, Cook MW, Harveson LA, Davis DS, Lopez RR, Silvy NJ, Fraker MA. 2006. Wildlife Society Bulletin 34(5):1430-1434.
11. Long-lasting, single-dose immunocontraception of feral fallow deer in British Columbia. Fraker MA, Brown RG, Gaunt GE, Kerr JA, Pohajdak B. 2002. Journal of Wildlife Management 66(4):1141-1147.
12. Factors contributing to the success of a single-shot, multiyear pZP immunocontraceptive vaccine for white-tailed deer. Miller LA, Fagerstone KA, Wagner DC, Killian GJ. 2009. Human-Wildlife Conflicts 3(1):103-115.
Elephants
13. The response of African elephants to a single-dose of SpayVac®, a pZP contraceptive vaccine, over a 7-year period. Bechert U, Fraker M. 2016. Pachyderm 57:97-108.
14. Implementing immunocontraception in free-ranging African elephants at Makalali Conservancy. Delsink A, van Altena J, Grobler D, Bertschinger H, Kirkpatrick J, Slotow R. 2007. Journal of South African Veterinary Association 78:25–30.
15. How immunocontraception can contribute to elephant management in small, enclosed reserves: Munyawana population as a case study. Druce H, Mackey R, Slotow R. 2011. PLoS ONE 6:e27952.
16. Contraceptive potential of the porcine zona pellucida vaccine in the African elephant (Loxodonta africana). Fayrer-Hosken R, Bertschinger H, Kirkpatrick J, Grobler D, Lamberski N, Honneyman G, Ulrich R. 1999. Theriogenology 52:835–846.
Seals
17. Evidence for a long-lasting single administration vaccine in wild grey seals. Brown RG, Bowen WD, Eddington JD, Kimmins WC, Mezei M, Parson JL, Pohajdak B. 1997. Journal of Reproductive Immunology 35(1):43–51.
18. Temporal trends in antibody production in captive grey, harp and hooded seals to a single administration of immunocontraceptive vaccine. Brown RG, Bowen WD, Eddington JD, Kimmins WC, Mezei M, Parsons JL, Pohajdak B. 1997. Journal of Reproductive Immunology 35(1):53–64