Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

nafex - [NAFEX] Squirrels control using BonBon

nafex@lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: North American Fruit Explorers mailing list at ibiblio

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "Bassem Samaan" <bassem@gardener.com>
  • To: nafex@lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: [NAFEX] Squirrels control using BonBon
  • Date: Sun, 4 Oct 2009 06:21:14 -0500

There was an experiment done by a gardenweb member who discovered that using
bon bons is not effective in controlling squirrels.
He writes:

For those interested, I am conducting another test. While not complete, the
experiment if far enough along to offer some preliminary observations.
Since I'm actually trying to do research, I've decided to outline it in a
somewhat detailed and formal write-up.

BACKGROUND:

Squirrels have long been a major pest to fruit growers. This is especially
true for backyard growers with small orchards in urban and suburban settings.
The unusual combination of an abundance of food with few natural predators
encourages large populations of squirrels, of which tree fruit can be a
summertime food staple. To successfully grow tree fruit requires dedication.
For the serious fruit grower, it can take a significant amount of time, and
money. As anyone who has cared and nurtured crop has observed, there is often
a significant amount of emotional capital involved as well. All to often a
fruit grower nurtures a crop through the growing season, only to find
squirrels have destroyed the entire crop, just before harvest. Squirrels
accomplish this by:

1. simply removing the whole crop
2. leaving some crop, but taking "bites" out of individual fruits
3. knocking fruit off before it's ripe

In many cases experience of the squirrels' past behavior causes growers to
pick their harvest before it is ripe, to prevent squirrels from stealing it.
in this case, while the grower may obtain a premature harvest, fruit quality
suffers.

Growers have relied on many methods to prevent fruit damage by squirrels.
Each have their advantages and disadvantages. As it's not the scope of this
experiment, these individual methods will not be discussed except in summary:

1. Exclusion methods- Ex. electric fencing, flashing on trunks, netting. In
general, these methods have not been met with wide success. Squirrels are
agile, small and deft. They are determined creatures when it comes to a
favored food source, and will generally find an entry point in the barrier,
or make one.

2. Offering squirrels an alternate food source during harvest- This method is
generally not successful. Fruit seems to be as beloved by squirrels as it is
by humans.

3. Scaring the squirrels away- Ex. plastic owls, lights, sounds, radios, etc.
Poor results have been noted from these methods. Squirrels quickly become
acclimated to the scare methods, rendering them wholly ineffective.

4. Shooting squirrels. Ex. shotgun, 22 cal., pellet gun. Some locales allow
the discharge of firearms, some allow only pellet guns, and some allow
neither. Where allowed, these methods can reduce squirrel populations, but it
can be extremely time consuming.

5. Trapping- This can be done with live traps, or lethal traps such as Kania,
and connibear traps. This can be successful, but can be time consuming. Traps
can be expensive. Live traps are legal to use almost ubiquitously throughout
the U.S. However, many states prohibit the relocation of trapped wildlife, as
do wildlife specialists, so the animals must be destroyed. Kansas extension
services recommends destruction by CO2 asphyxiation. Leg hold traps may also
be an option, but the author no experience with this method. Leg hold traps
are illegal in some states due to humane concerns.

6. Poisoning/baiting- Unfortunately, there are no poison baits labeled for
squirrels that are available to homeowners. This has left homeowners to their
own devices to make homemade baits. One such bait is a mixture of peanut
butter and Plaster of Paris and rolled into small balls, called bon bons
(hereafter called bait). This bait is currently popular with backyard fruit
growers and is even used internationally. There is some debate in the fruit
growing community regarding this bait. The experiment outlined below focuses
on some questions outlined in that debate.

OBJECTIVES OF EXPERIMENT:

1. Attempt to determine if the bait is toxic to squirrels

2. If the bait is toxic, determine a reasonable estimate of time between bait
ingestion and mortality.

3. Try to determine the mode of action of the bait. That is some believe the
bait causes mortality by gastric blockage. Others surmise death is brought on
by hypercalcemia (elevated blood calcium). While it is beyond the scope of
this experiment to determine exact cause of death, the author should be able
to observe gastric blockage. If that is case, it would rule out
hypercalcemia. In the event, no gastric blockage is found, hypercalcemia
would be the likely cause of death.

4. Determine if the bait causes undo pain and suffering to the animal. This
may affect the decision on whether or not a grower decides to use the bait.
As almost any form of death is painful to mammals, it becomes difficult to
measure the relative suffering of one form of death over another. Most
squirrels die in nature from sickness, starvation, or predators. As the
author has never witnessed any of these occurrences, it becomes difficult to
determine suffering from death of the bait, relative to more natural causes
of demise they may face in nature. Added to the difficulty, is that no brain
scans will be done, so evaluations must be made on external observations
only. However, the author will do the best he can.

LIMITATIONS OF THE EXPERIMENT:

1. This experiment involves only 2 specimens. A treatment specimen (a
specimen which is offered the bait) and a control specimen. Since the
experiment involves such a small statistical sample, the results are not as
statistically relevant as if a larger specimen sample was used.

2. There are different types of Plaster of Paris. Using a different type of
Plaster of Paris may (though not likely) yield a different result.

3. Using a different ratio of Plaster of Paris to peanut butter, may yield a
different result.

SET UP OF EXPERIMENT:

One squirrel was captured on Sunday, September 27th. This squirrel was the
treatment specimen. Another squirrel was captured on Wednesday, September
30th, which was the control specimen. Both squirrels were kept in live traps
for the experiment. Water and food dishes were placed in their cages. The
squirrels did not require anesthesia to move them, or the dishes into their
cages. Water was replenished twice daily. The squirrels were both male
specimens of slightly smaller size. For the treatment squirrel, bait was
introduced immediately and not removed until completion of the forth day of
the test. For the control specimen, fresh acorns were kept in the cage at all
times. Bait was mixed using exactly 1/2 cup of peanut butter and 1/2 cup of
Plaster of Paris. From this mixture 6 evenly sized bon bons were fashioned.
All the mix was used making the 6 bon bons. No vegetable oil was required
with this mixture. A fresh 4 lb. box of Plaster of Paris was purchased for
this experiment (DAP brand). According to the MSDS it contains 60%-100%
Calcium Sulfate (Plaster of Paris); 10%-30% Calcium Carbonate (limestone);
and 0.5%-1.5% silica.

RESULTS:

Today is the fifth day of the experiment. So far, there has not been any
observed morbidity or mortality in the treatment specimen or the control.
Both the treatment specimen and control did not start eating until the second
day. As was stated, bait for the treatment specimen was introduced on day 1,
but not accepted until day 2. Bait was the only food available for the
treatment speicimen. The treatment specimen ate the bait consistently for
three days starting from the second day to the completion of the fourth day.
Bait was removed the fourth day and the treatment squirrel from then on has
received all the acorns it wants. Of the six bon bons made from the peanut
butter and Plaster of Paris, 1/2 of the bait, or three bon bons were placed
in the treatment specimen's cage at day one. From day 2 to day 4 the
treatment specimen consumed two bon bons. At the end of day 4 there was
enough bait left over in the treatment squirrels food dish to re-fashion one
bon bon. No wastage was observed, therefore by deduction, the squirrel must
have consumed two bon bons. Here is a photo of the re-fashioned bon bon. For
reference is is placed next to the three bon bons I did not use. The bon bon
on the right is what the treatment squirrel DIDN'T eat, out of the three bon
bons placed in its cage.


Once the bait was removed and replaced with acorns, the treatment squirrel
began eating acorns normally. So far in the experiment, the treatment
squirrel has not shown a decrease in appetite, whether being fed bait, or
acorns. At this point, both squirrels have not shown any visible signs of
pain, or lethargy.

One interesting observation is that on the beginning of day 3, the rodent
droppings of the treatment squirrel turned a very light color (almost white)
and became larger than normal. The droppings were very hard and broke as if
they were made of Plaster of Paris. I have included some photos below.

Here is a general photo of the treatment specimen's feces taken on day 4.
Notice the very light color:



Here is a close-up of the day 4 treatment specimen droppings. Notice the
pellet dropping broken in half and white inside:


Finally, here is a picture of the control rodent droppings taken on day 4.
Notice the black color. Although the picture doesn't show it, these droppings
are smaller than the lighter colored droppings of the treatment specimen.



The treatment specimen has been receiving acorns for over 24 hrs. and already
his droppings are looking more normal (i.e. smaller and black in color).

PRELIMINARY OBSERVATIONS:

Although it may be premature to conclude that the bait is not lethal, one may
well conclude it is not acutely so. It has been 4 days since the initial
consumption of bait with no mortality occurring up to this point. It should
be noted, that reports indicate hypercalcemia may take up to two weeks to
cause death. So if the bait is toxic, it would not exhibit quick results in
this case. It is possible it does not cause hypercalcemia at all. Although
rodents are very susc. to hypercalcemia, traditional rodent baits use
synthetic derivatives of vitamin D to achieve this end. Rodents do not have a
mechanism to properly process vitamin D. As such, vitamin D causes their
system to pull calcium out of their bones, and into their blood stream.
However, rodent baits use vit. D derivatives as an active ingredient, not
calcium based products as an active ingredient. It may be while rodents can't
process vit. D, they can process high doses of calcium without any adverse
affects.

It doesn't appear that the bait causes gastric blockage. The treatment
specimen ate nothing but bait for three days, and seemed to process it into
"pellets" (albeit large ones) without difficulty. At this point the stool
samples appear to be back to normal.

Lastly, up to this point, the bait does not appear to cause any suffering of
the animal.

This concludes my write-up at this point. I will plan on adding to this
report any further observations I notice.

Olpea

http://forums2.gardenweb.com/forums/load/fruit/msg0911021522891.html


Thanks,

Bass Samaan
http://www.TreesofJoy.com



--
An Excellent Credit Score is 750
See Yours in Just 2 Easy Steps!





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page