Woodrats from a Maricopa County, Arizona suburban community were tracked using radio-telemetry for one to two years to assess differences in home range and mean daily speed between animals left in their original location and those translocated to a nearby nature preserve. The small sample size did not permit determination of differences, and no trends were observed that would indicate observable differences between the translocated and non-translocated individuals. Woodrats that had been returned to their original locations near human development after being captured were located and released at the end of the study, while all but one of the animals that had been transferred to the nature preserve could not be located at the study's end. This study highlights the difficulties in obtaining good monitoring data in translocation efforts. The widespread lack of sufficient monitoring data in translocation programs is of concern to land managers and conservation scientists. More effective monitoring strategies are needed to assess the benefits and risks of animal translocations. Introduction
Translocations: Challenges and Responsive Measures
Wildlife translocations, or the purposeful movement of animals from one area to another by humans, are conducted extensively by natural resource agencies. Griffith et al. (1993) surveyed terrestrial vertebrate translocations in Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and the United States, and found that 50% of surveyed agencies translocated some species each year. The authors assessed that approximately 700 translocation programs were implemented each year in the early 1990's.
While terminology for classifying different types of translocations varies among authors, Spielman (1999) categorized translocations as falling into three categories: 1.introductions, 2.re-introductions, and 3.restocking. Introductions involve moving animals into areas where they previously did not exist. This would include the i...