01443naa a2200193 a 450000100080000000500110000800800410001902400390006010000170009924501070011626000090022352008840023265000100111665000210112665000120114765000110115970000180117077300610118815203812023-03-30       1975    bl uuuu     u00u1 u    #d7 a10.1080/03014223.1976.95179002DOI1 aRUDGE, M. R.  aComparison of some methods of capturing and marking feral goats (Capra hircus).h[electronic resource]  c1975  aAutomatic self-attaching collars, immobilising drugs, pen traps, and salt?lick lures were assessed as aids to marking feral goats in mountain country. Salt licks were ignored. Pen traps were prone to damage or could deter goats from using the area. Automatic collars required about 0.6 man-days work per collar taken, but wind?throw and disturbance by deer and trampers reduced their effectiveness. Darts shot from a Paxarm gun were used to inject non-lethal immobilising drugs. Fentanylazaperone was preferred to Rompun because recovery from it was accelerated with the antidote Lethidrone. Drug absorption was not materially hastened with hyaluronidase enzyme. Goats caught at a rate of 1/1.3 man?days were aged, sexed, and marked with a steel eartag, a chainlink collar, and an epoxy resin colour-coded horn cone. Coded cones were readable up to 150?200 m with x 9 binoculars.  aGoats  aMarking behavior  aCaprino  aManejo1 aJOBLIN, R. J.  tNew Zealand Journal Zoologygv. 3, n. 1, p. 51-55, 1975.