Suchergebnisse

Context
Evaluating predator management efficacy is difficult, especially when resources are limited. Carefully designing monitoring programs in advance is critical for data collection that is sufficient to evaluate management success and to inform decisions.

Aims
The aim was to investigate how the design of camera trap studies can affect the ability to reliably detect changes in red fox (Vulpes vulpes) activity over space and time. Specifically, to examine the effect of study duration, camera cost and detection zone under various environmental and management scenarios, including different fox densities, management impacts, monitoring budgets and levels of spatial and temporal variation.

Methods
A generalised linear mixed model was used to analyse simulated datasets from control sites and sites with predator management actions implemented, following a before–after or control–impact sampling design. Statistical power analyses were conducted to evaluate whether a change in fox abundance could be detected across various environmental and management scenarios.

Key results
Results showed that a before–after sampling design is less sensitive than a control–impact sampling design to the number of cameras used for monitoring. However, a before–after sampling design requires a longer monitoring period to achieve a satisfactory level of power, due to higher sensitivity to study duration. Given a fixed budget, there can be a trade-off between purchasing a small number of high quality cameras with large detection zones, or a larger number of cameras with smaller detection zones. In a control-impact design we found that if spatial heterogeneity was high, a larger number of cameras with smaller detection zones provided more power to detect a difference in fox abundance.

Conclusion
This simulation-based approach demonstrates the importance of exploring various monitoring designs to detect the effect of predator management across plausible environmental and budgetary scenarios.

Implications
The present study informs the monitoring design of an adaptive management program that aims to understand the role of managing fox predation on malleefowl (Leipoa ocellata), a threatened Australian bird. Furthermore, this approach provides a useful guide for developing cost-effective camera trap monitoring studies to assess efficacy of conservation management programs. Power analyses are an essential step for designing efficient monitoring, and indicate the strength of ecological signals that can realistically be detected through the noise of spatial and temporal heterogeneity under various budgetary constraints.

Context Invasive mammalian predators are a threat to biodiversity and agriculture globally, yet management outcomes for lethal predator control remain difficult to monitor and evaluate. Understanding whether changes in activity indices correspond to true changes in population density will help inform effective monitoring and management programs. Aims The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of poison baiting on invasive red fox (Vulpes vulpes) populations using two alternative population metrics: fox activity from camera trap surveys and density estimation from scat genetic analysis. Methods We conducted before–after control–impact studies in two regions of semi-arid Australia (Wimmera and Mallee) by monitoring paired non-treatment and treatment sites during unbaited and baited periods. We estimated the effects of poison baiting on: (1) a monthly fox activity index, derived from an array of 10 off-road camera traps per site; and (2) fox density. To estimate density, we collected fox scats along 14-km transects, identified individuals using polymorphic microsatellite DNA markers and fitted spatially explicit capture–recapture models. Key results Fox activity remained consistently low at all sites except the Mallee non-treatment. The top-ranked models of fox activity and density contained an interaction between treatment and period, with an interactive and additive effect of region, respectively. However, there was little evidence that baiting reduced fox activity or density. In the unbaited period, fox densities ranged from 0.69 (95% CI: 0.47–1.0) to 1.06 (95% CI: 0.74–1.51) foxes km−2 and were similar across regions. Conclusions Camera traps have the potential to provide continuous index-based measures of fox populations but may not record sufficient observations to detect change. Indices can also be confounded by variations in animal behaviour. Scat genetic analysis is a viable option for providing direct estimates of population change at specific snapshots in time; however, this approach is considerably more expensive, and large sample sizes may be required if genotyping success is low. Implications Our study presents a rare example of multiple concurrent – and non-invasive – monitoring techniques to evaluate the effectiveness of predator control. We highlight the value of rigorous study designs and high-quality density information for designing predator management and monitoring programs.