Cargando…

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

SIMPLE SUMMARY: Feral 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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Nichols, Margaret, Ross, James, Glen, Alistair S., Paterson, Adrian M.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6769530/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31527440
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ani9090687
_version_ 1783455258916159488
author Nichols, Margaret
Ross, James
Glen, Alistair S.
Paterson, Adrian M.
author_facet Nichols, Margaret
Ross, James
Glen, Alistair S.
Paterson, Adrian M.
author_sort Nichols, Margaret
collection PubMed
description SIMPLE SUMMARY: Feral 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. ABSTRACT: We 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.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6769530
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-67695302019-10-30 An Evaluation of Systematic Versus Strategically-Placed Camera Traps for Monitoring Feral Cats in New Zealand Nichols, Margaret Ross, James Glen, Alistair S. Paterson, Adrian M. Animals (Basel) Article SIMPLE SUMMARY: Feral 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. ABSTRACT: We 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. MDPI 2019-09-16 /pmc/articles/PMC6769530/ /pubmed/31527440 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ani9090687 Text en © 2019 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Nichols, Margaret
Ross, James
Glen, Alistair S.
Paterson, Adrian M.
An Evaluation of Systematic Versus Strategically-Placed Camera Traps for Monitoring Feral Cats in New Zealand
title An Evaluation of Systematic Versus Strategically-Placed Camera Traps for Monitoring Feral Cats in New Zealand
title_full An Evaluation of Systematic Versus Strategically-Placed Camera Traps for Monitoring Feral Cats in New Zealand
title_fullStr An Evaluation of Systematic Versus Strategically-Placed Camera Traps for Monitoring Feral Cats in New Zealand
title_full_unstemmed An Evaluation of Systematic Versus Strategically-Placed Camera Traps for Monitoring Feral Cats in New Zealand
title_short An Evaluation of Systematic Versus Strategically-Placed Camera Traps for Monitoring Feral Cats in New Zealand
title_sort evaluation of systematic versus strategically-placed camera traps for monitoring feral cats in new zealand
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6769530/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31527440
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ani9090687
work_keys_str_mv AT nicholsmargaret anevaluationofsystematicversusstrategicallyplacedcameratrapsformonitoringferalcatsinnewzealand
AT rossjames anevaluationofsystematicversusstrategicallyplacedcameratrapsformonitoringferalcatsinnewzealand
AT glenalistairs anevaluationofsystematicversusstrategicallyplacedcameratrapsformonitoringferalcatsinnewzealand
AT patersonadrianm anevaluationofsystematicversusstrategicallyplacedcameratrapsformonitoringferalcatsinnewzealand
AT nicholsmargaret evaluationofsystematicversusstrategicallyplacedcameratrapsformonitoringferalcatsinnewzealand
AT rossjames evaluationofsystematicversusstrategicallyplacedcameratrapsformonitoringferalcatsinnewzealand
AT glenalistairs evaluationofsystematicversusstrategicallyplacedcameratrapsformonitoringferalcatsinnewzealand
AT patersonadrianm evaluationofsystematicversusstrategicallyplacedcameratrapsformonitoringferalcatsinnewzealand