DOI: 10.5061/dryad.k6djh9w8f
title: Data from: Do ditch-side electrical fences improve the breeding productivity of ground-nesting waders?

description: Insufficient reproduction as a consequence of predation on eggs and chicks
 is a major determinant of population decline in ground-nesting birds,
 including waders. For many populations, there is an urgent need to
 maintain breeding populations at key sites, and conservation practitioners
 need to find viable management solutions to reduce predation. One tool
 available to the practitioner are fences that exclude key predators from
 areas containing breeding birds. Temporary electric fencing is an
 increasingly popular predator exclusion intervention, but such fences have
 costs associated with purchase and the time needed to erect and maintain
 them. Their effectiveness and optimal application are also frequently
 questioned. We evaluate the use of temporary ditch-side four-strand
 electric fences in lowland grasslands in two countries, The Netherlands
 and England, in areas containing high densities of breeding waders. In
 both countries and in all years, godwit and lapwing nest survival was
 significantly higher within areas enclosed by ditch-side electric fences.
 Brood survival, assessed for godwits in The Netherlands, was also higher
 within fenced areas in all years. This demonstrates that using temporary
 electric fences to enclose ground-nesting birds can be an effective tool
 for improving breeding productivity. In our study, closely managed
 electric fences were effective at excluding red foxes Vulpes vulpes, but
 not avian and other mammalian predators. The positive effect that electric
 fencing had on nest and brood survival therefore likely results from a
 reduction in the total number of visits by mammalian predators, and
 especially visits by foxes. Although it requires a substantial time
 investment throughout the period of use, our temporary electric fence
 design provides flexibility compared to other fence designs when it comes
 to enclosing different areas within a season and between years, as the
 targets for protection change or as land and flood management dictate.
 This conservation intervention can help buy the time required to develop
 and implement longer term solutions for application at larger scales.
description: All files are numbered, a new number for each
 analysis/topic.
 <strong>1.NL_AnnualNestEstimate</strong><br>This file contains the nest monitoring data of Godwits in The Netherlands from 2013-2018 that was used to produce annual nest survival estimates (Figure 3a). Every nest has a unique NestID, attribute data that follows the MARK-analysis format, and a column specifying whether it was inside or outside the fenced area.<br><br><strong>2.ENG_AnnualandDailyNestEstimate</strong><br>This file contains the nest monitoring data of Lapwing and Godwits in England from 2015-2019 that was used to produce annual nest survival estimates (Figure 3b) and daily survival rates (Figure 4b). Every nest has a unique NestID, attribute data that follows the MARK-analysis format, a column specifying the species, and a column specifying whether it was inside or outside the fenced area. <strong>3.NL_DailyNestEstimate</strong><br>This file contains the nest monitoring data of Lapwing and Godwits in The Netherlands from 2017-2018 that was used to produce daily survival rates (Figure 4a). Every nest has a unique NestID, attribute data that follows the MARK-analysis format, a column specifying the species, and a column specifying whether it was inside or outside the fenced area. <strong>4.NL_BroodSurvival</strong><br>This file contains the brood monitoring data of Godwits in The Netherlands from 2013-2018 that was used to calculate brood survival (Figure 5). For each year and for both the fenced and unfenced area the file specifies the number of survived broods and failed broods.