A comparison of horizontal versus vertical camera placement to detect feral cats and mustelids

Nichols, Margaret; Glen, Alistair S.; Garvey, Patrick M.; Ross, James G.

doi:10.20417/nzjecol.41.11

Cited by 20 publications

(26 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In addition to the three mammals commonly targeted with tracking tunnels, remote cameras also recorded more possums and seven other species that tracking tunnels missed completely, including other introduced mammals (especially cats) and native birds. The number of species that could be recorded by remote cameras may be even larger considering that cameras can remain active over much longer periods of time than tunnels without additional effort in the field (Nichols et al 2017). Longer monitoring periods also enable remote cameras to detect animals at low densities (Rowcliffe et al 2008).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Magle et al 2014;Allen et al 2016a, b). To efficiently monitor mammals using remote cameras, appropriate deployment of the cameras is crucial (Nichols et al 2017). Previous research has suggested that animal detection rates from cameras differ based on the methodology (e.g.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…baited or unbaited stations, horizontal or vertical camera set up, and camera models), habitat, animal traits (e.g. body size and speed) and environmental conditions (Rowcliffe et al 2011;Nichols et al 2017). In New Zealand, remote cameras have successfully been used to monitor feral cats (Felis catus) and European rabbits (Oryctolagus cuniculus), as well as interspecific interactions at bait stations (Sam 2011;Latham et al 2012;Glen et al 2016).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Evaluation of remote cameras for monitoring multiple invasive mammals in New Zealand

Hartley¹,

Wittmer²

2018

NZ J Ecol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Numerous conservation projects in New Zealand aim to reduce populations of invasive mammalian predators to facilitate the recovery of native species. However, results of control efforts are often uncertain due to insufficient monitoring. Remote cameras have the potential to monitor multiple species of invasive mammals. To determine the efficiency of cameras as a multi-species monitoring tool, we compared the detection rates of remote cameras and tracking tunnels over 4 non-consecutive days across 40 sites in Wellington. On average, cameras detected significantly more hedgehogs (Erinaceus europaeus) and rats (Rattus spp.) than tracking tunnels, and their images could be used to identify rats to the species level in 50% of detections. Cameras also detected more possums (Trichosurus vulpecula) but missed recording mice (Mus musculus) on some occasions where tracking tunnels detected them, and vice-versa. We conclude that remote cameras are well-suited for simultaneously monitoring multiple species of invasive mammals in New Zealand.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Evaluation of remote cameras for monitoring multiple invasive mammals in New Zealand

Hartley¹,

Wittmer²

2018

NZ J Ecol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Trail cameras are being used increasingly to monitor small mammals in New Zealand (Nichols et al 2017;Anton et al 2018;Murphy et al 2018;Nugent et al 2019). Cameras monitor a broad range of species and can provide information on species identity (e.g.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effectiveness of aerial 1080 for control of mammal pests in the Blue Mountains, New Zealand

Dilks¹,

Sjoberg²,

Murphy³

2020

NZJE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The endemic fauna of New Zealand evolved in the absence of mammalian predators and their introduction has been devastating. Large-scale aerial applications of cereal baits containing sodium fluoroacetate (1080) are routinely used to control these pests. During one such operation in the Blue Mountains, West Otago, trail cameras were used to monitor the impact of the application on mammalian predators. Both stoats and rats were regularly recorded on cameras throughout the study area before the poison operation, but no stoats or rats were recorded the day after the operation, and none had returned by the time monitoring ended 38 days later. Possum, mouse and hedgehog detections were also significantly reduced. The aerial 1080 operation was therefore effective at controlling pests, and there was no evidence of a decline in bird or deer abundance due to non-target poisoning. Before this study it was not known that hedgehogs could be controlled by aerial 1080; this finding reveals an added benefit from its application. The use of trail cameras was effective at monitoring a range of species and although more labour-intensive than traditional monitoring methods, it provided more detailed information.

show abstract

“…However, there is often wide variation in the deployment of camera traps within a landscape (i.e., number of sampling units used at each site and their distance from each other) [18,19]. For example, camera traps may be placed in a variety of ways, such as with a horizontal or vertical orientation [20,21]; baited or unbaited [22,23]; non-biased or biased allocation across a landscape [24], as in systematic grids/transects [9,25,26]; or deliberately placed near likely target species ‘hot spots’, such as trails, roads, and water features [27].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

An Evaluation of Systematic Versus Strategically-Placed Camera Traps for Monitoring Feral Cats in New Zealand

Nichols

Ross

Glen

et al. 2019

Animals

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Simple SummaryFeral cats are detrimental to native biodiversity worldwide. In New Zealand, feral cats are well established across much of the pastoral landscape, including forested areas. Feral cats, like many carnivore species, are elusive in their nature, and often occur at low densities, making them difficult to detect. Camera traps are a useful, non-invasive monitoring device, capable of ‘capturing’ feral cats as they pass by. Although cameras provide a wealth of information about animals within their field of view; there remains much to be learned about optimal camera trap placement within a landscape, if maximizing detection probability is the objective. Here, we report the results of two methods of camera trap deployment within similar sites: (1) systematic deployment on a grid and (2) strategic deployment, predominantly favoring habitats with assumed higher cat activity. Using the Royle–Nichols abundance-induced heterogeneity model (RN), which assumes detection probability and animal abundance are linked, we found that more cats were detected by cameras at forest margins than in mixed scrub or open farmland (but only slightly more than in forest locations). If maximizing cat detections is the aim, we recommend that cameras should be placed at the edges of forests (including forest fragments) whenever feasible. AbstractWe deploy camera traps to monitor feral cat (Felis catus) populations at two pastoral sites in Hawke’s Bay, North Island, New Zealand. At Site 1, cameras are deployed at pre-determined GPS points on a 500-m grid, and at Site 2, cameras are strategically deployed with a bias towards forest and forest margin habitat where possible. A portion of cameras are also deployed in open farmland habitat and mixed scrub. We then use the abundance-induced heterogeneity Royle–Nichols model to estimate mean animal abundance and detection probabilities for cameras in each habitat type. Model selection suggests that only cat abundance varies by habitat type. Mean cat abundance is highest at forest margin cameras for both deployment methods (3 cats [95% CI 1.9–4.5] Site 1, and 1.7 cats [95% CI 1.2–2.4] Site 2) but not substantially higher than in forest habitats (1.7 cats [95% CI 0.8–3.6] Site 1, and 1.5 cats [95% CI 1.1–2.0] Site 2). Model selection shows detection probabilities do not vary substantially by habitat (although they are also higher for cameras in forest margins and forest habitats) and are similar between sites (8.6% [95% CI 5.4–13.4] Site 1, and 8.3% [5.8–11.9] Site 2). Cat detections by camera traps are higher when placed in forests and forest margins; thus, strategic placement may be preferable when monitoring feral cats in a pastoral landscape.

show abstract

A comparison of horizontal versus vertical camera placement to detect feral cats and mustelids

Cited by 20 publications

References 21 publications

Evaluation of remote cameras for monitoring multiple invasive mammals in New Zealand

Evaluation of remote cameras for monitoring multiple invasive mammals in New Zealand

Effectiveness of aerial 1080 for control of mammal pests in the Blue Mountains, New Zealand

An Evaluation of Systematic Versus Strategically-Placed Camera Traps for Monitoring Feral Cats in New Zealand

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About