The camera trap is a powerful research tool that has a wide range of ecological applications and facilitates monitoring over large spatial and temporal scales. To improve the reliability of camera trap studies and provide more knowledge on camera performance, we evaluated three aspects of camera traps that researchers should consider -camera height, blank images and missed detections. We deployed 20 camera stations, each consisting of one low camera (0.6 m) and two adjacent high cameras (3 m). We tested for differences in detection rates and blank images between camera heights. We calculated missed detections using the two high cameras and used a subset of cameras (n = 14) to examine whether missed detections were caused by late triggers or failed triggers. We found that placing cameras high to minimize theft and damage did not influence detection rates. There were, however, more blank images which can increase the time required for analysis. These blank images increased as temperature increased. Missed detections were primarily the result of failed triggers and increased as species size decreased. Failed detections are particularly significant for distribution surveys of low-density species. Detection at the camera is imperfect, even when working with larger species.
Calf (Bos taurus) depredation by the federally endangered Florida panther (Puma concolor coryi) on ranches in southwest Florida is an important issue because ranches represent mixed landscapes that provide habitat critical to panther recovery. The objectives of this study were to (1) quantify calf depredation by panthers on two ranches in southwest Florida, and (2) develop a habitat suitability model to evaluate the quality of panther hunting habitat on ranchlands, assess whether the model could predict predation risk to calves, and discuss its potential to be incorporated into an incentive-based compensation program. We ear-tagged 409 calves with VHF transmitters on two ranches during 2011–2013 to document calf mortality. We developed a model to evaluate the quality of panther hunting habitat on private lands in southwest Florida using environmental variables obtained from the Florida Natural Areas Inventory (FNAI) Cooperative Landcover Database and nocturnal GPS locations of panthers provided by the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC). We then tested whether the model could predict the location of calf depredation sites. Tagged calf loss to panthers varied between the two ranches (0.5%/yr to 5.3%/yr) and may have been influenced by the amount of panther hunting habitat on each ranch as the ranch that experienced higher depredation rates contained a significantly higher probability of panther presence. Depredation sites of tagged calves had a significantly greater probability of panther presence than depredation sites of untagged calves that were found by ranchers in open pastures. This suggests that there may be more calves killed in high risk environments than are being found and reported by ranchers and that panthers can hunt effectively in open environments. It also suggests that the model may provide a means for evaluating the quality of panther hunting habitat and the corresponding risk of depredation to livestock across the landscape. We suggest that our approach could be applied to prioritize and categorize private lands for participation in a Payment for Ecosystem Services program that compensates landowners for livestock loss and incentivizes conserving high quality habitat for large carnivores where livestock depredation is a concern.
Recovery of the Florida panther (Puma concolor coryi) depends on habitat conservation on private rangelands. However, cattlemen-panther conflicts and lack of trust in wildlife agencies is undermining panther conservation efforts. Based on semi-structured interviews and group meetings with Florida cattlemen, we examine how cattlemen's land stewardship practices support panther conservation, and causes of conflicts with the panther and wildlife agencies. Given the heterogeneous attitudes of cattlemen and their varying economic conditions, a complementary suite of programs is needed to achieve efficient conservation of the panther and panther habitat. Current and proposed government incentive programs are unlikely to attain the level of habitat conservation required to recover the Florida panther. We suggest that efforts should be made to build social capital and trust by engaging influential cattlemen in panther conservation actions, thereby lending credibility to conservation initiatives and improving the rate of uptake and levels of commitment by other cattlemen. Moreover, providing cattlemen with payments that are contingent on keeping lands as unimproved pasture or wildlife habitat without mandating particular land management practices may be an effective policy alternative.
Changes in behavior and habitat use are often influenced by the risk of predation, including harvest, and carnivores alter their habitat use and movements to minimize predation risk. Large carnivores are subject to harvest around the world; however, few studies examine whether habitat use is different between harvested and unharvested carnivore populations. We examined the effects of harvest on gray wolf (Canis lupus) use of pup-rearing habitat. We predicted that in comparison to an unharvested population of wolves, wolves subject to harvest would use less suitable pup-rearing habitat (i.e., sites with no standing water source and dense vegetation with no open areas) and locate pup-rearing sites in areas with lower human activity. We also predicted that wolves would use less suitable pup-rearing habitat following breeder turnover. Finally, we predicted that field surveys using a method for monitoring an unharvested wolf population would detect fewer active pup-rearing sites and document fewer detections of scat, tracks, and howls of a harvested wolf population. We tested whether a habitat model for predicting pup-rearing sites used by an unharvested wolf population accurately predicted sites used by a harvested wolf population. To examine the effect of human activity, we calculated the road density within a 500-m buffer around sites used by an unharvested and harvested population of wolves. We also evaluated the habitat suitability of pup-rearing sites following the death of a breeder. Finally, we conducted field surveys of a harvested wolf population with a monitoring technique used for unharvested wolf populations, and compared detections of pup-rearing sites, scats, tracks, and howls between the unharvested and harvested wolf populations. Harvest did not affect wolf use of puprearing habitat. Wolves subject to harvest used highly suitable habitat (i.e., areas with standing, ephemeral water) to raise pups, road density near pup-rearing sites did not differ between harvested and unharvested wolf populations, and breeder turnover did not result in packs choosing less suitable pup-rearing habitat. Finally, field surveys successfully detected pup-rearing sites of wolves subject to harvest but documented fewer detections of scats and tracks, likely because of a decrease in wolf density. Wolves subject to harvest chose highly suitable habitat to raise pups, indicating that such habitat provides optimal resources in a landscape where harvest is a dominant source of mortality. In areas where such habitat is limited, it is important to consider how environmental changes affect the availability of suitable habitat. Ó 2018 The Wildlife Society.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2025 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.