Accessing camera trap survey feasibility for estimating Blastocerus dichotomus (Cetartiodactyla, Cervidae) demographic parameters

Unmanned aerial vehicle surveys reveal unexpectedly high density of a threatened deer in a plantation forestry landscape

The Vulnerable marsh deer Blastocerus dichotomus, the largest native cervid in South America, is declining throughout its range as a result of the conversion of wetlands and overhunting. Estimated densities in open wetlands of several types are 0.1–6.8 individuals per km2. We undertook the first unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) survey of the marsh deer to estimate the density of this species in a 113.6 km2 area under forestry management in the lower delta of the Paraná River, Argentina. During 6–8 August 2019, at a time of year when canopy cover is minimal, we surveyed marsh deer using Phantom 4 Pro UAVs along 94 transects totalling 127.8 km and 8.6 km2 (8.1% of the study area). The 5,506 photographs obtained were manually checked by us and by a group of 39 trained volunteers, following a standardized protocol. We detected a total of 58 marsh deer, giving an estimated density of 6.90 individuals per km2 (95% CI 5.26–8.54), which extrapolates to 559–908 individuals in our 113.6 km2 study area. As it has generally been assumed that marsh deer prefer open habitats, this relatively high estimate of density within a forestry plantation matrix is unexpected. We discuss the advantages of using UAVs to survey marsh deer and other related ungulates.

The relationship between landscape features and domestic species on the occupancy of native mammals in urban forests

Landscape features such as roads, hiking trails, and forest edge are prevalent features of urban forests. These features can negatively influence biodiversity through fragmentation and facilitate the penetration of invasive species, particularly predators such as domestic dogs and cats. This study examined how these landscape features affect the distribution of native and domestic mammals and how domestic species affect the occupancy and activity patterns of native mammals. To this end, we conducted camera trap surveys in forested urban and suburban parks in Indiana and Kentucky, USA, to record the presence of native species (deer, raccoons, coyote, and opossums) and non-native predators (domesticated cats and dogs) in relation to distance to nearest roads, hiking trails, and forest edge. We found negative correlations between proximity to roads, hiking trails, and forest edge and the occupancy of the native species with this effect extending up to 300 m. We also found evidence that the presence of dog and cat was negatively correlated with the occupancy for all native species. We recommend park management consider the impact of roads, hiking trails, and forest edge when designing parks and the enforcement of dog leash regulations for the conservation of large mammals in urban parks.

Snap happy: camera traps are an effective sampling tool when compared with alternative methods

Camera traps have become a ubiquitous tool in ecology and conservation. They are routinely deployed in wildlife survey and monitoring work, and are being advocated as a tool for planetary-scale biodiversity monitoring. The camera trap's widespread adoption is predicated on the assumption of its effectiveness, but the evidence base for this is lacking. Using 104 past studies, we recorded the qualitative overall recommendations made by study authors (for or against camera traps, or ambiguous), together with quantitative data on the effectiveness of camera traps (e.g. number of species detected or detection probabilities) relative to 22 other methods. Most studies recommended the use of camera traps overall and they were 39% more effective based on the quantitative data. They were significantly more effective compared with live traps (88%) and were otherwise comparable in effectiveness to other methods. Camera traps were significantly more effective than other methods at detecting a large number of species (31% more) and for generating detections of species (91% more). This makes camera traps particularly suitable for broad-spectrum biodiversity surveys. Film camera traps were found to be far less effective than digital models, which has led to an increase in camera trap effectiveness over time. There was also evidence from the authors that the use of attractants with camera traps reduced their effectiveness (counter to their intended effect), while the quantitative data indicated that camera traps were more effective in closed than open habitats. Camera traps are a highly effective wildlife survey tool and their performance will only improve with future technological advances. The images they produce also have a range of other benefits, for example as digital voucher specimens and as visual aids for outreach. The evidence-base supports the increasing use of camera traps and underlines their suitability for meeting the challenges of global-scale biodiversity monitoring.