Studies on the European hare. 41. A spotlight, circular-plot method for counting Brown hares in the hedgerow system

Wasilewski, Michał

doi:10.4098/at.arch.91-26

Cited by 8 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Even in mainly arable areas, pasture can be negatively associated with density (Pépin, 1985, 1987; Marboutin & Aebischer, 1996; Table 2). The variation in density with habitat type that we found throughout Europe agrees with findings of individual studies comparing densities in different habitat types (Frylestam, 1979; Verheyden, 1991; Hutchings & Harris, 1996). However, here we found that density was similar in arable and mixed habitats in autumn, but that in spring mixed habitats had lower densities than arable habitats, particularly in areas of intermediate‐intensity farming.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 89%

A quantitative analysis of the abundance and demography of European hares Lepus europaeus in relation to habitat type, intensity of agriculture and climate

2005

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

1. European hares Lepus europaeus have declined throughout Europe since the 1960s. Possible reasons for this include agricultural intensification and changes in climate and predator numbers, but no clear consensus has been reached as to the relative importance of each of these. We aimed to identify factors associated with high and low hare numbers throughout Europe, to determine which could have caused population declines. 2.Results of 77 research papers from 12 European countries were summarized. Relationships between hare density and demographics and habitat, climate, hunting and predator variables were examined and quantified where possible. Temporal changes in factors identified as being associated with high or low numbers of hares were then examined to see if they could explain population declines. 3. Data from pastural habitats were limited, but densities of hares were low. Arable habitats had higher densities than mixed areas in spring, unless farming was intensive in which case densities were similar. In autumn the two habitats had similar densities. Field size, temperature, precipitation and hunting had no effect on density throughout Europe. Fecundity was affected by climate. 4. Arable land, various crops, fallow habitat and temperature were positively associated, and monoculture, precipitation and predators negatively associated with hare abundance. The relationship of field size, pasture and woodland with abundance depended on spatial scale. 5. Habitat changes caused by agricultural intensification are the ultimate cause of hare population declines. Effects of changes in climate or predator numbers are magnified by the loss of high-quality year-round forage and cover. Further research is required on how habitat changes affect fecundity and survival, and to identify which parameters have the greatest impact on population numbers. Farmland management policies that target the reestablishment of some of the habitat diversity lost within fields, farms and landscapes will help to reverse the decline of the European hare.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 89%

A quantitative analysis of the abundance and demography of European hares Lepus europaeus in relation to habitat type, intensity of agriculture and climate

2005

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Use of spotlights for assessing hare numbers has become increasingly popular over the past 20 years (Eltringham & Flux, 1971;Salzmann-Wandeler & Salzmann, 1973;Frylestam, 1981;Barnes & Tapper, 1985;Pegel, 1986;Verheyden, 1991), but the methodology varies widely from one study to the next. A summary of the methods employed by the three most recent of these studies is used to illustrate the main differences between the approaches in current use.…”

Section: Spotlight Countsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Recent work by Verheyden (1991) and Péroux et al (1997) has addressed ways of improving the reliability of spotlight methodology, and adapting it for use in less open habitats such as the hedgerow/field system, through modification of the circular-plot method used for taking censuses of forest birds (Emlen, 1971). Sampling points are chosen as close as practical to points on a systematic grid of isosceles triangles 600 m apart overlaid on a map on the study site.…”

Section: Spotlight Countsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…They include various methods based on taking censuses (that is, detecting all the individuals present) within finite sampling areas, e.g. clearance drives or total capture (Andrzejewski & Jezierski, 1966;Gross, Stoddart & Wagner, 1974), belt-assessment (Jezierski & Pielowski, 1958;Pielowski, 1969), drag line counts (Barnes, Tapper & Williams, 1983), spotlighting (Frylestam, 1981;Barnes & Tapper, 1985;Pegel, 1986;Stoate & Tapper, 1993) and vantage point counts (Hewson, 1976), as well as plotless estimation techniques which do not require the definition of a finite area, such as point or line transects (Webb, 1942;Gross et al, 1974;Wywialowski & Stoddart, 1988;Verheyden, 1991). Estimates of hare densities have also been based on 'capture-mark-recapture' methods (Hewson, 1965;Angerbjorn, 1986) and counts of faecal pellets (Krebs, Gilbert & Boonstra, 1987;Wray, 1992), while analysis of annual hunting bag records have been used to provide at least indices of abundance (Strandgaard & Asferg, 1980;Tapper & Parsons, 1984;Tapper, 1987).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Techniques for assessing the abundance of Brown Hares Lepus europaeus

Langbein¹,

Hutchings²,

Harris³

et al. 1999

Mammal Review

100

105

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Over the last few decades, there have been significant declines in Brown Hare Lepus europaeus numbers throughout Europe, leading to concern for their status in many countries. In Britain, there were no quantified data on the extent of this decline, on current population levels, or any baseline against which to monitor future population changes. The need for a quantified national hare survey led to this evaluation of the techniques available to assess hare numbers. Published information on counting hares is reviewed, and various techniques compared by applying them to a number of sites in southern England. Three basic approaches are available: counts of inactive hares, counts of active hares and indirect methods. Counts of inactive hares include total clearance, wide belt and line transect counts. Total clearance counts give an absolute figure, but are labour intensive and can only be applied to restricted areas. Wide‐belt assessments are difficult to apply in certain habitats and even in open areas tend to produce a substantial over‐estimate. Line transect counts are easy to undertake and are not labour intensive but should only be applied to large areas, or data from several small areas combined. Counts based on active hares are more problematical, because it is difficult to determine what proportion of the population is inactive at any one time. Spotlight counts based on variable circular plots are the most accurate but difficult to apply widely, and twilight counts are very subjective in their interpretation, especially when surveying small areas or areas with a large proportion of concealing habitats. Of the indirect methods, dung pellet counts can be valuable in specific areas but are difficult to apply across a range of habitats. We concluded that, of the various techniques considered, line transect counts have the greatest potential for a national survey, but need to be stratified so that enough transects are undertaken within each habitat stratum to obtain a reliable mean population estimate for each stratum.

show abstract

“…The crew consisted of the driver and two observers, each one holding two million candle spotlights which were used to light up both sides of the road. Surveys began two hours after sunset (Verheyden, 1991;Langbein et al, 1999). Visits were postponed during intensive rains and in thick mist.…”

Section: Spotlight Countsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Do Weather and Moon Have Any Influence on Spotlighting Mammals? The Case of Hare in Upland Ecosystem

Sokos¹

2015

Appl Ecol Env Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Nocturnal spotlight survey is a common census technique for many mammal species. The influence of abiotic factors may be essential for the appropriate design of censuses, however this method has not been examined sufficiently in relation to abiotic factors such as weather conditions and the moon. We tested their influence for a commonly counted species, the brown hare (Lepus europaeus). Spotlight surveys were conducted at certain night time and transects in three upland Mediterranean areas, at different times of the year, different moon phases and under a variety of weather conditions. Wind speed and direction had an influence on hare counts with stronger winds resulted in fewer juvenile hares being observed, and more hares were counted when wind was blowing from the hare towards the vehicle. No significant effects were found from the other factors probably due to the intense relief and thick vegetation of the studied areas.

show abstract

Studies on the European hare. 41. A spotlight, circular-plot method for counting Brown hares in the hedgerow system

Cited by 8 publications

References 18 publications

A quantitative analysis of the abundance and demography of European hares Lepus europaeus in relation to habitat type, intensity of agriculture and climate

A quantitative analysis of the abundance and demography of European hares Lepus europaeus in relation to habitat type, intensity of agriculture and climate

Techniques for assessing the abundance of Brown Hares Lepus europaeus

Do Weather and Moon Have Any Influence on Spotlighting Mammals? The Case of Hare in Upland Ecosystem

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About