Vulpes vulpes (red fox)
- Summary of Invasiveness
- Taxonomic Tree
- Distribution Table
- Habitat List
- Species Vectored
- Biology and Ecology
- Means of Movement and Dispersal
- Pathway Causes
- Impact Summary
- Environmental Impact
- Threatened Species
- Risk and Impact Factors
- Uses List
- Similarities to Other Species/Conditions
- Prevention and Control
- Links to Websites
- Principal Source
- Distribution Maps
Don't need the entire report?
Generate a print friendly version containing only the sections you need.Generate report
PicturesTop of page
IdentityTop of page
Preferred Scientific Name
- Vulpes vulpes (Linnaeus, 1758)
Preferred Common Name
- red fox
Other Scientific Names
- Canis vulpes (Linnaeus, 1758)
International Common Names
- English: fox; silver fox; silver, black or cross fox
- Spanish: zorro
- French: renard
Local Common Names
- Denmark: raev
- Germany: Fuchs; Rotfuchs
- Iran: rubah
- Italy: volpe
- Lithuania: lape
- Netherlands: vos
- Poland: lis
- Portugal: raposa
- VULPVU (Vulpes vulpes)
Summary of InvasivenessTop of page
Native to Europe, Asia, North Africa and boreal regions of North America, Vulpes vulpes (the red fox) have been introduced into Australia and temperate regions of North America. They are now the most widely distributed carnivore in the world and have negative impacts on many native species, including smaller canids and ground nesting birds in North America, and many small and medium-sized rodent and marsupial species in Australia. This species has been nominated as among 100 of the "World's Worst" invaders.
Taxonomic TreeTop of page
- Domain: Eukaryota
- Kingdom: Metazoa
- Phylum: Chordata
- Subphylum: Vertebrata
- Class: Mammalia
- Order: Carnivora
- Suborder: Fissipeda
- Family: Canidae
- Genus: Vulpes
- Species: Vulpes vulpes
DescriptionTop of page
The red fox is a member of the family Canidae which includes wolves, jackals and coyotes. Males are slightly larger than females. Both males and females, but particularly females, have seasonal variations in body weight. Geographic and subspecies variations in size also occur. Adults have a head and body length of 570 to 740 mm, a tail length of 360 to 450 mm and weigh between 4.5 to 8.3 kilograms (Coman 1983, in Saunders et al. 1995). In general, throat and abdomen are white, lower legs and ears are black and a bushy tail is tipped in white. Three colour morphs of V. vulpes are recognised: red, silver/black and cross. A pale-yellowish colour morph is common on the Arabian peninsula and within native subspecies in North America.
DistributionTop of page
Native range: V. vulpes occurs in Europe, North Africa, most of Asia (excluding extreme Southeast Asia and southern India) and boreal regions of North America. It occurs naturally only in the northern hemisphere and is found throughout most of the Palaearctic region (Saunders et al. 1995).
Known introduced range: Australia, Canada, USA and northern Mexico. Red foxes introduced into Australia in the 1850s have spread throughout the entire continent, except perhaps the north-central region. They have recently been introduced to Tasmania. Red foxes introduced into the eastern USA, starting in the mid-1700s, have spread throughout all lowland areas of the eastern and central USA and all of Canada. Red foxes transplanted from the eastern USA into California in the late 1800s have since spread throughout lowland areas of the western coast states, southwards into northern Mexico. Introduced red foxes may continue to spread southward into other areas of the New World and are now the most widely distributed carnivore in the world.
Distribution TableTop of page
The distribution in this summary table is based on all the information available. When several references are cited, they may give conflicting information on the status. Further details may be available for individual references in the Distribution Table Details section which can be selected by going to Generate Report.Last updated: 10 Jan 2020
|Continent/Country/Region||Distribution||Last Reported||Origin||First Reported||Invasive||Reference||Notes|
|Isle of Man||Present||Introduced||Invasive||First reported: Believed to be 1986|
|Canada||Present||Introduced||Invasive||First reported: 1800s|
|-Alberta||Present||Introduced||Invasive||First reported: mid-1900s|
|-British Columbia||Present||Introduced||Invasive||First reported: mid-1900s|
|-Manitoba||Present||Introduced||Invasive||First reported: mid-1900s|
|-New Brunswick||Present||Introduced||Invasive||First reported: 1800s|
|-Newfoundland and Labrador||Present||Introduced||Invasive||First reported: mid-1900s|
|-Northwest Territories||Present||Introduced||Invasive||First reported: mid-1900s|
|-Nova Scotia||Present||Introduced||Invasive||First reported: 1800s|
|-Ontario||Present||Introduced||Invasive||First reported: 1800s|
|-Prince Edward Island||Present||Introduced||Invasive||First reported: 1800s|
|-Quebec||Present||Introduced||Invasive||First reported: 1800s|
|-Saskatchewan||Present||Introduced||Invasive||First reported: mid-1900s|
|-Yukon||Present||Introduced||Invasive||First reported: mid-1900s|
|Mexico||Present||Introduced||Invasive||First reported: late 1900s|
|-Arizona||Present||Introduced||Invasive||First reported: 1990s|
|-Arkansas||Present||Introduced||Invasive||First reported: <1900|
|-California||Present||Introduced||Invasive||First reported: early 1900s|
|-Colorado||Present||Introduced||Invasive||First reported: 1960s|
|-Connecticut||Present||Introduced||Invasive||First reported: 1800s|
|-Delaware||Present||Introduced||Invasive||First reported: 1700-1800s|
|-District of Columbia||Present||Introduced||Invasive||First reported: 1700-1800s|
|-Florida||Present||Introduced||Invasive||First reported: 1800s|
|-Georgia||Present||Introduced||Invasive||First reported: 1800s|
|-Idaho||Present||Introduced||Invasive||First reported: 1960s|
|-Illinois||Present||Introduced||Invasive||First reported: 1800s|
|-Indiana||Present||Introduced||Invasive||First reported: 1800s|
|-Iowa||Present||Introduced||Invasive||First reported: 1800s|
|-Kansas||Present||Introduced||Invasive||First reported: early 1900s|
|-Kentucky||Present||Introduced||Invasive||First reported: 1800s|
|-Louisiana||Present||Introduced||Invasive||First reported: 1800s|
|-Maine||Present||Introduced||Invasive||First reported: 1800s|
|-Maryland||Present||Introduced||Invasive||First reported: 1700-1800|
|-Massachusetts||Present||Introduced||Invasive||First reported: 1800s|
|-Michigan||Present||Introduced||Invasive||First reported: 1800s|
|-Minnesota||Present||Introduced||Invasive||First reported: 1800s|
|-Mississippi||Present||Introduced||Invasive||First reported: 1800s|
|-Missouri||Present||Introduced||Invasive||First reported: 1800s|
|-Montana||Present||Introduced||Invasive||First reported: 1960s|
|-Nebraska||Present||Introduced||Invasive||First reported: early 1900s|
|-Nevada||Present||Introduced||Invasive||First reported: 1980s|
|-New Hampshire||Present||Introduced||Invasive||First reported: 1800s|
|-New Jersey||Present||Introduced||Invasive||First reported: 1700-1800s|
|-New York||Present||Introduced||Invasive||First reported: 1800s|
|-North Carolina||Present||Introduced||Invasive||First reported: 1700-1800s|
|-North Dakota||Present||Introduced||Invasive||First reported: 1930s|
|-Ohio||Present||Introduced||Invasive||First reported: 1800s|
|-Oklahoma||Present||Introduced||Invasive||First reported: early 1900s|
|-Oregon||Present||Introduced||Invasive||First reported: early 1900s|
|-Pennsylvania||Present||Introduced||Invasive||First reported: 1700-1800s|
|-Rhode Island||Present||Introduced||Invasive||First reported: 1800s|
|-South Carolina||Present||Introduced||Invasive||First reported: 1700-1800s|
|-South Dakota||Present||Introduced||Invasive||First reported: 1930s|
|-Tennessee||Present||Introduced||Invasive||First reported: 1800s|
|-Texas||Present||Introduced||Invasive||First reported: early 1900s|
|-Utah||Present||Introduced||Invasive||First reported: 1980s|
|-Vermont||Present||Introduced||Invasive||First reported: 1800s|
|-Virginia||Present||Introduced||Invasive||First reported: 1700-1800s|
|-Washington||Present||Introduced||Invasive||First reported: early 1900s|
|-West Virginia||Present||Introduced||Invasive||First reported: 1700-1800s|
|-Wisconsin||Present||Introduced||Invasive||First reported: 1800s|
|-Wyoming||Present||Introduced||Invasive||First reported: 1960s|
|-New South Wales||Present||Introduced||1871||Invasive|
|-Northern Territory||Present||Introduced||Invasive||First reported: early 1900s|
HabitatTop of page
The worldwide distribution of the red fox, ranging from tundra to the desert as well as urban areas, suggests that it can survive in most sorts of environments (Saunders et al. 1995). The fox is probably most abundant in fragmented environments typically found in agricultural landscapes because these offer a wide variety of cover, food and den sites (Saunders et al. 1995). More uniform, open environments are less favoured as are heavily forested or mountainous areas. Foxes do not live entirely within closed canopy forests but can penetrate some distance into them in search of food (Jarman 1986, in Saunders et al. 1995). The red fox appears to be absent from areas with tropical climates, such as Asia, although the reasons for this are unclear. In Australia the fox can survive in habitats ranging from arid through to alpine as well as urban. The only limitations on distribution appear to be the presence of dingoes and the tropical climate of the northern parts of Australia (Saunders et al. 1995).
Habitat ListTop of page
|Terrestrial||Managed||Cultivated / agricultural land||Present, no further details|
|Terrestrial||Managed||Managed forests, plantations and orchards||Present, no further details|
|Terrestrial||Managed||Disturbed areas||Present, no further details|
|Terrestrial||Managed||Urban / peri-urban areas||Present, no further details|
|Terrestrial||Natural / Semi-natural||Natural forests||Present, no further details|
|Terrestrial||Natural / Semi-natural||Natural grasslands||Present, no further details|
|Terrestrial||Natural / Semi-natural||Riverbanks||Present, no further details|
|Terrestrial||Natural / Semi-natural||Cold lands / tundra||Present, no further details|
Biology and EcologyTop of page
Foxes prey particularly on small to medium-sized, ground-dwelling and semi-arboreal mammals, ground-nesting birds and chelid tortoises (DEWHA 2008b). Terrestrial mammals in Australia at the greatest risk are those that weigh between 35 g and 5.5 kg (critical weight range species), including ground-nesting birds, many of which are endangered or vulnerable (DEWHA 2008a). Although predominantly carnivorous, the fox is an opportunistic predator and scavenger with no specialised food requirements (Saunders et al. 1995). Foxes are omnivorous, consuming fruit, vegetables, eggs and insects, especially when they are seasonally available. Diet studies conducted in Australia show rabbits, house mice and sheep taken as carrion to be the most common food items (Saunders et al. 1995).
Females reproduce only once a year. Gestation lasts 51 to 53 days with most cubs born during August and September. In Australia females are reproductively active from July to October with a peak during August in southeastern Australia (McIntosh 1963a, Ryan 1976a, in Saunders et al. 1995). In temperate regions breeding occurs from December to April (later in more northern latitudes). Mean litter size is four up to a maximum of about ten (Saunders et al. 1995). Both sexes become sexually mature from ten months of age (Saunders et al. 1995). Although social groups of one male and several vixens do exist, most foxes are thought to have only one mate; males may also leave their normal territory temporarily in search of other mating opportunities (Saunders et al. 1995).
Parturition occurs after a gestation of 51 to 53 days. Lactation lasts for approximately five weeks and weaning occurs gradually. Females can breed before one year of age, however, in areas of high density most yearlings do not produce pups. V. vulpes can live up to 9 years in the wild, although few individuals live more than 6 years. In the northern hemisphere, dispersal usually occurs from September to January.
Means of Movement and DispersalTop of page
Introduction pathways to new locations
Natural dispersal: Exceptional movements of over 300 kilometres have been recorded in North America and 100 kilometres in Europe (Corbet and Harris 1991, in Saunders et al. 1995). Mean dispersal distances are much smaller than this, ranging from 2.8 to 43.5 kilometres for males and 1.8 to 38.6 kilometres for females (Trewhella et al. 1988, in Saunders et al. 1995).
Other: Introduced for sport hunting purposes in Australia and USA
Local dispersal methods
Natural dispersal (local): Males disperse further than females and dispersal distances are usually < 50km, with shorter dispersals < 10km) in urban fox populations.
Pathway CausesTop of page
|Hunting, angling, sport or racing||Yes|
Impact SummaryTop of page
ImpactTop of page
Reduction in native biodiversity: The damage to Australian wildlife since European settlement has been catastrophic (e.g. Salo et al. 2007). At least 20 species of Australian mammals have become extinct (Saunders et al. 1995). This represents about one half of the world’s mammal extinctions in the last 200 years; a further 43 species are judged to be either endangered or vulnerable (Commonwealth Endangered Species Advisory Committee Report 1992, in Saunders et al. 1995). The causes are complex and the impact of foxes on wildlife have probably been exacerbated by habitat modification and fragmentation (Saunders et al. 1995).
In Austrialia the fox has eliminated remnant populations of some native rodent and marsupial species. The best known Australian example of impact on a native species as reported by Saunders and colleagues (1995) is that of the 'Near Threatened (NT)' black-footed rock-wallaby (Petrogale lateralis), living in small, relict colonies in the wheatbelt of Western Australia. Management of local fox populations using poisoned baits resulted in a substantial increase in wallaby numbers. Another threatening process which has recently come to light is the impact of predation by foxes on native marsupials and on the 'Vulnerable (VU)' malleefowl Leipoa ocellata) (Saunders et al. 1995). For more examples of Australian fox removal studies please see Saunders et al. 1995.
In North America, introduced foxes have negative impacts on many ground-nesting birds, such as ducks and grouse. In California, European red foxes have to be controlled on an annual basis to protect the nesting grounds of several endangered species of birds. European red foxes also negatively impact smaller native canids, such as the endangered San Joaquin kit foxes and subspecies of native red foxes.
Competition: The impact of competition by foxes appears to be secondary to that of predation. Morris (1992) suggests foxes may compete with the chuditch or western quoll (Dasyurus geoffroii) for food in jarrah forest in Western Australia. Foxes also prey on young chuditch.
Agricultural: European red foxes are also a threat to livestock as they prey on poultry, lambs and kids.
Disease Transmission: In its introduced range in Australia the fox carries no diseases of serious economic or public health significance, although recently foxes have been found to harbour the hydatid parasite (Saunders et al. 2007). Controversy still surrounds its possible role as a wild reservoir host for the rabies virus (Saunders et al. 2007). In many parts of the northern hemisphere, the fox is the main reservoir of this disease and, given the widespread distribution of foxes in Australia, the possibility of rabies developing as an established disease in fox populations cannot be dismissed (Saunders et al. 2007).
Many other infectious diseases occur in foxes, although little is known of their incidence in Australia, or their impact on population regulation. These include mange, canine distemper, parvovirus, toxoplasmosis, canine hepatitis, tularaemia, leptospirosis, staphylococcal infections and encephalitis (Saunders et al. 1995). Like most carnivores that feed on a wide range of prey, foxes also carry a variety of endoparasites (Saunders et al. 1995). The incidence of helminth parasites, in foxes in particular, has been intensively surveyed in southeastern Australia because of their potential transmission to domestic animals (Saunders et al. 1995).
Environmental ImpactTop of page
There is a close relationship between fox and rabbit numbers (Saunders et al. 2007). When rabbit populations crash, due to drought, myxomatosis or Rabbit Calicivirus Disease (RCD), there will be a lag period until fox numbers decline and adjust to the reduced prey population. The likelihood of increased predation pressure on native wildlife over this period needs to be considered. Rabbit numbers may also be affected by foxes. Preliminary studies suggest that foxes and feral cats may slow the recovery of rabbit populations after they crash due to drought or disease. The potential role of foxes in rabbit control and the impact of foxes on native wildlife following crashes in rabbit populations needs to be clarified (Saunders et al. 2007).
Threatened SpeciesTop of page
Risk and Impact FactorsTop of page
- Negatively impacts agriculture
- Reduced native biodiversity
- Competition - monopolizing resources
- Competition (unspecified)
- Pest and disease transmission
UsesTop of page
Wild-caught V. vulpes are used in sport hunting. Foxes are also raised in farms, where they generate millions of dollars a year worldwide; for example in the EU from 2001 to 2002 fur farms generated US $4 600 million (International Fur Trade Federation Undated). Most of the world’s farmed fur is produced in Europe, accounting for 63% of fox production (EU = 47%); Finland is the world’s largest producer and exporter of fox skin (International Fur Trade Federation Undated). Russia/the Baltic States and China account respectively for 11% and 27% of fox production (International Fur Trade Federation Undated).
Uses ListTop of page
- Sport (hunting, shooting, fishing, racing)
Similarities to Other Species/ConditionsTop of page
Native red foxes of North America are very often confused with the introduced red fox with European origin. Their taxonomy is still unresolved (see Notes in Ecology Section). Native red foxes are smaller, and most often exhibit black, cross, or yellowish color phases, whereas introduced red foxes are a cherry red color. Native red foxes are a cold-adapted subspecies, and only occur in the boreal forests of Canada and northern U.S.A., and in montane habitats at higher elevations in the Rocky Mountains of the western U.S.A. Introduced red foxes occur in all other habitats (and also in the boreal forests of Canada and northern U.S.A.).
Prevention and ControlTop of page
Due to the variable regulations around (de)registration of pesticides, your national list of registered pesticides or relevant authority should be consulted to determine which products are legally allowed for use in your country when considering chemical control. Pesticides should always be used in a lawful manner, consistent with the product's label.
An analysis by Salo and colleagues (2007) has confirmed that introduced predators generally have detrimental impacts on populations of native species. Impacts on prey are much greater in Australia than in other parts of the world. Since the early days of European settlement in Australia, control of predators has been attempted using a variety of methods, including shooting, trapping, fencing and poisoning (Rolls 1969, in Glen et al. 2007). Control of urban foxes also presents a problem, as conventional lethal techniques (e.g., shooting, poisoning and trapping) cannot be used in built up areas. Efforts are now directed towards mitigating the impact of the fox using baits to deliver vaccines or poisons or to regulate fertility (Armstrong 2004; Marks et al. 1996; Vos 2003). The ongoing costs of fox control are high. To aerially bait approximately 35 000 square kilometers/year costs approximately $1.3 million (Saunders & McLeod 2007, in DEWHA 2008b). Exclusion fencing costs up to $10 000/km (DEWHA 2008b).
Preventative Measures: Fox scats are surprisingly persistent in the field and sufficient DNA is contained within scats for 100% accuracy in species identification, even after three months of weathering. DNA-based species identification is robust, no matter what method is used to extract DNA (Berry et al. 2007). DNA extraction with the commercial kit was the most costly (about AU$6.0, Euro 3.6, US$4.4 per sample in consumables) and time-consuming aspect of scat processing (compared with less than AU$0.10 per sample for chelex). Use of a cheaper and more straightforward extraction protocol places fewer constraints on the number of scats that could be processed.
Physical: Exclusion fencing is used to protect areas of high conservation value (Algar & Smith 1998, in Robley et al. 2007). It has proven to be a valuable tool in aiding the re-introduction of species to areas from which they have been previously eliminated by feral animals such as foxes (Robley et al. 2007). Results from fencing trials by Robley and colleagues (2007) indicate that fences should be 1.8 m high, have an overhang that is at least 600 mm in circumference that is curved or shaped in such a way that prevents animals climbing over from underneath, and have an apron with a mesh hard enough to prevent foxes chewing through. Electric fencing is not required.
Chemical: In Australia the fox is most commonly managed by setting baits impregnated with 1080 (sodium fluoroacetate) poison (Gentle et al. 2007). Fox numbers are controlled by laying dried meat baits containing the poison 1080 (sodium monofluroacetate) at least four times per year. The poison is a naturally occuring substance found in native plants called gastrolobiums or 'poison peas'. While native animals have evolved with these plants and have a high tolerance to the poison, introduced animals do not. Baits consist either of fresh or dried meat, offal, chicken eggs or commercial mixtures (Saunders & McLeod 2007, in Glen et al. 2007). Baiting is the only method currently available for predator control that can be used successfully over broad areas (Gentle 2005, in Glen et al. 2007). However, the long-term effectiveness of such control campaigns is likely to be limited due to the ability of foxes to disperse over considerable distances and to swiftly recolonise areas (Gentle et al. 2007). In southeastern Australia, baiting for foxes by landholders is encouraged by state government agencies. However, for reasons including bait caching and bait degradation, current baiting practices may not always be efficient or effective (Gentle et al. 2007). Managers should adopt a approach which seeks to minimise potential risk to non-target individuals, while clarifying population-level effects through continued research (Glen et al. 2007).
Fertility regulators include cabergoline, a dopamine agonist that has previously been demonstrated to have an abortifacient effect in cats (Felis catus) and dogs (Canis familiaris) (see Marks et al. 1996). Marks and colleagues (1996) report that the chemical is palatable to foxes and easily incorporated into a non-poisonous bait. The incidence of cubs was significantly lower in treatment dens than in the controls.
Vos (2003) reports that as a result of oral vaccination of foxes rabies has almost been completely eradicated from Western and Central Europe.
BibliographyTop of page
Bomford, M., 2003. Risk Assessment for the Import and Keeping of Exotic Vertebrates in Australia. Bureau of Rural Sciences, Canberra. http://www.feral.org.au/feral_documents/PC12803.pdf
Churcher, C. S. 1959. The specific status of the New World red fox. Journal of Mammalogy 40: 513-520.
Dickman, C. R. 1996. Impact of exotic generalist predators on the native fauna of Australia. Wildlife Biology 2: 185-195.
Ebbert and Byrd., 2002. Eradications of invasive species to restore natural biological diversity on Alaska Maritime National Wildlife Refuge. In Turning the tide: the eradication of invasive species: 102-109. Veitch, C.R. and Clout, M.N.(eds). IUCN SSC Invasive Species Specialist Group. IUCN. Gland. Switzerland and Cambridge. UK.
Enhanced Fox Management Program, 2004. Department of Sustainability and Environment, Victoria.
Foxes in Tasmania - A Grave Threat to Our Wildlife, 2004. Department of Primary Industries, Water & Environment, Australia. http://www.dpiwe.tas.gov.au/inter.nsf/WebPages/SJON-52J8U3
Foxes, 2004 NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service.
Ginsberg, J. R., and D. W. Macdonald. 1990. Foxes, wolves, jackals, and dogs: an action plan for the conservation of canids. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland.
IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. http://www.iucnredlist.org/
IUCN/SSC Invasive Species Specialist Group (ISSG)., 2010. A Compilation of Information Sources for Conservation Managers Involved in the Prevention, Eradication, Management and Control of the Spread of Invasive Alien Species that are a Threat to Native biodiversity and Natural Ecosystems.
Kamler, J. F., and W. B. Ballard., 2002. A review of native and nonnative red foxes in North America. Wildlife Society Bulletin 30:370-379.
Lariviere, S., and M. Pasitschniak-Arts. 1996. Vulpes vulpes . Mammalian Species 537:1-11
Lewis, J. C., K. L. Sallee, and R. T. Golightly, Jr. 1999. Introduction and range expansion of nonnative red foxes (Vulpes vulpes ) in California. American Midland Naturalist 142:372-381.
Macdonald, D. W. and C. Sillero-Zubiri. 2004. Biology and conservation of wild canids. Oxford University Press, UK.
Mosquin, Theodore (Ted)., 1997. Management Guidelines for Invasive Alien Species in Canada's National Parks. http://www.ecospherics.net/AlienSpecnew.htm
Nowak, R. M. 1999. Walkers mammals of the world. 6th edition. The Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore.
NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service (2001). Threat Abatement Plan for Predation by the Red Fox (Vulpes vulpes). NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service, Hurstville. http://www.nationalparks.nsw.gov.au/npws.nsf/Content/Foxes
Pest Animal Control CRC., undated. European red fox Vulpes vulpes feral.com.au http://www.feral.org.au/content/species/fox.cfm
Reynolds, J.C and Short, M., 2003. The status of foxes Vulpes vulpes on the Isle of Man in 1999. Mammal Review 33(1). 69-76
Sillero-Zubiri, C., M. Hoffman, and D. W. Macdonald (eds.). 2004. Canids: foxes, wolves, jackals and dogs. Status survey and conservation action plan. IUCN/SSC Canid Specialist Group. Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, UK. Sillero-Zubiri, C., M. Hoffman, and D. W. Macdonald (eds.). 2004. Canids: foxes, wolves, jackals and dogs. Status survey and conservation action plan. IUCN/SSC Canid Specialist Group. Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, UK. http://www.canids.org/cap/COVER.pdf
SouthernArk Project, 2004. Department of Sustainability and Environment, Victoria, Australia.
Strahan, R. 1995. Mammals of Australia. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, D.C.
Threat Abatement Plan for Predation by the European Red Fox., 1999. Department of Environment and Heritage, Australian Governement. http://www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/threatened/publications/tap/foxes/index.html
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, 1999. Threatened and Endangered Species: Aleutian Canada goose (Branta canadensis leucopareia) http://alaska.fws.gov/media/acg/fact.pdf
Varnham, K. 2006. Non-native species in UK Overseas Territories: a review. JNCC Report 372. Peterborough: United Kingdom. http://www.jncc.gov.uk/page-3660
Voigt, D. R. 1987. Red fox. Pages 379-392 in M. Novak, J. A. Baker, M. E. Obbard, and B. Mallock, editors. Wild furbearer management and conservation in North America. Ministry of Natural Resources, Ontario, Canada
Western Shield, 2003.Department of Conservation and Land Management, Governement of Western Australia.
ReferencesTop of page
US Fish and Wildlife Service, 2011. In: Endangered and Threatened Species; Determination of Nine Distinct Population Segments of Loggerhead Sea Turtles as Endangered or Threatened. 76(184) US Fish and Wildlife Service, 58868-58952. http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2011-09-22/pdf/2011-23960.pdf
CABI Data Mining, 2001. CAB Abstracts Data Mining.,
CABI, Undated. CABI Compendium: Status as determined by CABI editor. Wallingford, UK: CABI
Invasive Species Specialist Group (ISSG), 2011. Global Invasive Species Database (GISD). In: Global Invasive Species Database (GISD), Auckland, New Zealand: University of Auckland. http://www.issg.org/database
ContributorsTop of page
- Reviewed by: Jan F. Kamler, Wildlife Conservation Research Unit. Oxford University UK
- Last Modified: Thursday, July 29, 2010
Distribution MapsTop of page
Select a dataset
CABI Summary Records
Unsupported Web Browser:
One or more of the features that are needed to show you the maps functionality are not available in the web browser that you are using.
Please consider upgrading your browser to the latest version or installing a new browser.
More information about modern web browsers can be found at http://browsehappy.com/