Abundance and use pattern of wildcats of ancient human-modified cattle pastures in northern Iberian Peninsula

The wildcat is typically found in low densities. Here, we estimated wildcat abundance in cattle pastures interspersed between forests in northern Iberian Peninsula, and their patterns of intra-annual and daily use. We censused wildcats three times daily (morning, afternoon, and night) from a car during 4 years in summer season. We also carried out four monthly tracks (two in the morning and two in the afternoon) for a complete year. Overall, we recorded 191 wildcats in pastures and 5 on the road in forest zones. Thirteen different individual wildcats were identified during the summer censuses, but only 29.9% of the wildcats observed (n = 196) could be assigned to an individual wildcat. The number of wildcats sighted decreased especially during the last year, when sightings were 52–67% lower than in previous years. Wildcats were seen significantly more during the morning and night censuses than during the afternoon ones. Estimated annual summer densities in pasture areas ranged between 0.11 and 0.46 sightings/km2. Throughout the year, wildcats were observed 5.9 times more during summer-autumn than during winter-spring, and they could be observed in any time of the day, but more often close to dusk. It is noteworthy that the ancient human-transformed landscapes for cattle pastures could be an important habitat for wildcats in northern Iberian Peninsula, and conserving these areas should be important to maintaining wildcat populations.

Evaluating livetrapping and camera-based indices of small-mammal density

Density estimates are integral to wildlife management, but they can be costly to obtain. Indices of density may provide efficient alternatives, but calibration is needed to ensure the indices accurately reflect density. We evaluated several indices of small-mammal density using livetrapping and motion-activated cameras in the Cascade Mountains of Washington (USA). We used linear regression to compare spatially explicit capture–recapture density estimates of mice (genus Peromyscus Gloger, 1841), voles (genera Microtus Schrank, 1798 and Myodes Pallas, 1811), and chipmunks (genus Neotamias A.H. Howell, 1929) with four indices. Two indices were based on livetrapping (minimum number alive (MNA) and number of captures per 100 trap-nights) and two indices were based on photos from motion-activated cameras (proportion of cameras detecting a species and number of independent detections). We evaluated how the accuracy of trap-based indices increased with trapping effort using subsets of the full dataset (n = 7 capture occasions per site). Most indices provided reliable indicators of small-mammal density, and livetrapping indices (R2 = 0.64–0.98) outperformed camera-based indices (R2 = 0.24–0.86). All indices performed better for more abundant species. The effort required to estimate each index varied and indices that required more effort performed better. These findings should help managers, conservation practitioners, and researchers select small-mammal monitoring methods that best fit their needs.