Estimating abundance and distribution of rare species

1. Estimating abundance and distribution of rare species Traditional and novel methods

2. Outline: Data collection Data analysis • Invasive • Non-invasive • Simple • Complex

3. Invasive data collection methods

7. Trapping Pros: Cons: • Gives great individual data • Mass • Sex • Condition • Age • Parasite load • Can be dangerous to animal or researcher • Hard to get info on a lot of individuals • Requires a lot of work • Requires drugs • Lot of incidental captures • Requires bait

13. Radio telemetry Pros: Cons: • Gives great location and demographic data • Requires a lot of manual labor • Equipment expensive • Requires a lot of trapping • Can be dangerous to animal and researcher • Hard to get info on a lot of individuals

15. GPS telemetry Pros: Cons: • The absolute best location data* • Minimal man-hours (compared to radio telemetry) • VERY expensive • Requires a lot of trapping • Only available for larger animals • Hard to get info on a lot of individuals • Can be dangerous to animal

16. Non-invasive data collection methods

20. Game cameras Pros Cons • Relatively cheap • Less man-power required • Little risk to animal or researcher • No individual information* • Requires bait

24. Hair snares Pros Cons • Really cheap • Less man-power required • Little risk to animal or researcher • Easier to get individual information • Requires bait • Hairs can be mis-identified

27. Track plates / tubes Pros Cons • Really cheap • Less man-power required • Little risk to animal or researcher • No individual information • Requires bait • Tracks can be mis-identified

30. Track transects Pros Cons • Really cheap • Little risk to animal or researcher • Unbiased habitat use (no bait) • Tracks easier to identify • More detailed information • No individual information • Moderate man-power required • Requires particular environmental conditions

32. Scat / Excrement surveys Pros Cons • Really cheap • Little risk to animal or researcher • No bait • Lots of information • Can identify individual • Moderate man-power required • Hard to find scat in field – typically use roads • Can mis-identify scat • Best for larger animals

35. Vocalizations Pros Cons • Sometimes cheap • Little risk to animal or researcher • No bait • Sometimes expensive • No individual information • Moderate man-power required • Can mis-identify calls • Won’t work well with some species

36. Detection dogs

37. Detection dogs

38. Detection dogs

39. Scat-detection dogs

40. Scat-detection dogs

41. Scat-detection dogs

42. Black bear scat • Eastern-spotted skunk scat • Weasel scat • Mountain lion scat • Cheetah scat • Invasive Pythons • Invasive Root fungi

43. Detection dogs Pros Cons • Increased data • Little risk to target species or researcher • No bait • Expensive (but cheap per sample) • May not get individual information • Moderate man-power required • Low risk of mis-identification

44. Genetics Pros Cons • Decreases identification errors • Can provide individual information • Expensive (but getting cheaper) • DNA doesn’t always amplify • Some potential for error

45. Data analysis Abundance

46. Abundance – MNA • Easy • Only accurate with high detectability • Requires intense sampling • Each individual counted (census) • Assumes no one is missed

47. Abundance – Mark-recapture • Software available for analyses • Accurate with low to moderate detectability • Requires less sampling effort • Complicated • Statistical model that estimates population size • Accounts for detectability • Uses maximum likelihood

48. Data analysis Habitat use

49. Data analysis – Habitat analysis • Use vs. non-use • Use vs. availability • Non-use vs. availability • Occupancy • Use vs. non-use accounting for detectability

50. Habitat analysis – Use vs. non-use • Relatively easy • Estimates absolute probability of habitat use • Requires high detectability • Comparison of ‘used’ points vs. ‘unused’ points • Logistic regression • Assumes non-use is detected perfectly