An estimate or index of target species density is important in determining oral rabies vaccination (ORV) bait densities to control and eliminate specific rabies variants. From 1997–2011, we indexed raccoon (Procyon lotor) densities 253 times based on cumulative captures on 163 sites from Maine to Alabama, USA, near ORV zones created to prevent raccoon rabies from spreading to new areas. We conducted indexing under a common cage trapping protocol near the time of annual ORV to aid in bait density decisions. Unique raccoons (n = 8,415) accounted for 68.0% of captures (n = 12,367). We recaptured raccoons 2,669 times. We applied Schnabel and Huggins mark‐recapture models on sites with ≥3 years of capture data and ≥25% recaptures as context for raccoon density indexes (RDIs). Simple linear relationships between RDIs and mark‐recapture estimates supported application of our index. Raccoon density indexes ranged from 0.0–56.9 raccoons/km2. For bait density decisions, we evaluated RDIs in the following 4 raccoon density groups, which were statistically different: (0.0–5.0 [n = 70], 5.1–15.0 [n = 129], 15.1–25.0 [n = 31], and >25.0 raccoons/km2 [n = 23]). Mean RDI was positively associated with a higher percentage of developed land cover and a lower percentage of evergreen forest. Non‐target species composition (excluding recaptured raccoons) accounted for 32.0% of captures. Potential bait competitors accounted for 76.5% of non‐targets. The opossum (Didelphis virginiana) was the primary potential bait competitor from 27°N to 44°N latitude, north of which it was numerically replaced by the striped skunk (Mephitis mephitis). We selected the RDI approach over mark‐recapture methods because of costs, geographic scope, staff availability, and the need for supplemental serologic samples. The 4 density groups provided adequate sensitivity to support bait density decisions for the current 2 bait density options. Future improvements to the method include providing random trapping locations to field personnel to prevent trap clustering and marking non‐targets to better characterize bait competitors. © 2020 The Authors. The Journal of Wildlife Management published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of The Wildlife Society.

Oral rabies vaccination (ORV) is an effective tactic for wildlife rabies control, particularly for containment of disease spread along epizootic fronts. As part of the continuing evaluation of the ORV program in free-ranging raccoons ( Procyon lotor) in the US, 37 raccoons from ORV-baited areas in Pennsylvania were live-trapped and transferred to captivity to evaluate protection against rabies in animals with varying levels of existing neutralizing antibodies, expressed in international units per milliliter (IU/mL). Among the 37 raccoons at the date of capture, 24% (9/37) of raccoons were seronegative (<0.05 IU/mL), 22% (8/37) were low positive (≥0.05-0.11 IU/mL), 27% (10/37) were medium positive (>0.11-<0.5 IU/mL), and 27% (10/37) were high positive (≥0.5 IU/mL). Raccoons were held for 86-199 d between the date of capture and rabies virus challenge. At challenge, 68% (25/37) raccoons were seronegative. The overall survival rate among challenged animals was 46% (17/37). Based on the antibody titers at the time of challenge, survivorship was 24% (6/25) among seronegative animals, 100% (4/4) among low positive animals, 83% (5/6) among medium positive animals, and 100% (2/2) among high positive animals. Evidence of high-titer seroconversion after vaccination is a good surrogate indicator of rabies survival; however, survival rates of approximately 45% (15/35) were found among raccoons with detectable titers below 0.5 IU/mL. In contrast, any detectable titer at the time of challenge (>3 mo after vaccination) appeared to be a surrogate indicator of survival. Overall, we illustrated significant differences in the value of specific titers as surrogates for survival based on the timing of measurement relative to vaccination. However, survivorship was generally greater than 45% among animals with any detectable titer regardless of the timing of measurement. These findings suggest that lower titer cutoffs may represent a valid approach to measuring immunization coverage within ORV management zones, balancing both sensitivity and specificity for estimating herd immunity.