As delphinid populations become increasingly exposed to human activities we rely on our capacity to produce accurate abundance estimates upon which to base management decisions. This study applied mark–recapture methods following the Robust Design to estimate abundance, demographic parameters, and temporary emigration rates of an Indo-Pacific bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops aduncus) population off Bunbury, Western Australia. Boat-based photo-identification surveys were conducted year-round over three consecutive years along pre-determined transect lines to create a consistent sampling effort throughout the study period and area. The best fitting capture–recapture model showed a population with a seasonal Markovian temporary emigration with time varying survival and capture probabilities. Abundance estimates were seasonally dependent with consistently lower numbers obtained during winter and higher during summer and autumn across the three-year study period. Specifically, abundance estimates for all adults and juveniles (combined) varied from a low of 63 (95% CI 59 to 73) in winter of 2007 to a high of 139 (95% CI 134 to148) in autumn of 2009. Temporary emigration rates (γ') for animals absent in the previous period ranged from 0.34 to 0.97 (mean  =  0.54; ±SE 0.11) with a peak during spring. Temporary emigration rates for animals present during the previous period (γ'') were lower, ranging from 0.00 to 0.29, with a mean of 0.16 (± SE 0.04). This model yielded a mean apparent survival estimate for juveniles and adults (combined) of 0.95 (± SE 0.02) and a capture probability from 0.07 to 0.51 with a mean of 0.30 (± SE 0.04). This study demonstrates the importance of incorporating temporary emigration to accurately estimate abundance of coastal delphinids. Temporary emigration rates were high in this study, despite the large area surveyed, indicating the challenges of sampling highly mobile animals which range over large spatial areas.

Determining population viability of rare insects depends on precise, unbiased estimates of population size and other demographic parameters. We used data on the endangered St. Francis' satyr butterfly (Neonympha mitchellii francisci) to evaluate 2 approaches (mark-recapture and transect counts) for population analysis of rare butterflies. Mark-recapture analysis provided by far the greatest amount of demographic information, including estimates (and standard errors) of population size, detection, survival, and recruitment probabilities. Mark-recapture analysis can also be used to estimate dispersal and temporal variation in rates, although we did not do this here. Models of seasonal flight phenologies derived from transect counts (Insect Count Analyzer) provided an index of population size and estimates of survival and statistical uncertainty. Pollard-Yates population indices derived from transect counts did not provide estimates of demographic parameters. This index may be highly biased if detection and survival probabilities vary spatially and temporally. In terms of statistical performance, mark-recapture and Pollard-Yates indices were least variable. Mark-recapture estimates were less likely to fail than Insect Count Analyzer, but mark-recapture estimates became less precise as sampling intensity decreased. In general, count-based approaches are less costly and less likely to cause harm to rare insects than mark-recapture. The optimal monitoring approach must reconcile these trade-offs. Thus, mark-recapture should be favored when demographic estimates are needed, when financial resources enable frequent sampling, and when marking does not harm the insect populations. The optimal sampling strategy may use 2 sampling methods together in 1 overall sampling plan: limited mark-recapture sampling to estimate survival and detection probabilities and frequent but less expensive transect counts.

Summary1. Research that yields conflicting results rightly causes controversy. Where methodological weaknesses are apparent, there is ready opportunity for discord within the scientific community, which may undermine the entire study. 2. We use the debate about the role of dingoes Canis dingo in conservation in Australia as a case study for a phenomenon that is relevant to all applied ecologists, where conflicting results have been published in high-quality journals and yet the problems with the methods used in these studies have led to significant controversy. 3. To alleviate such controversies, scientists need to use robust methods to ensure that their results are repeatable and defendable. To date, this has not occurred in Australia's dingo debate due to the use of unvalidated indices that rely on unsupported assumptions. 4. We highlight the problems that poor methods have caused in this debate. We also reiterate our recommendations for practitioners, statisticians and researchers to work together to develop long-term, multi-site experimental research programmes using robust methods to understand the impacts of dingoes on mesopredators. 5. Synthesis and applications. Incorporating robust methods and appropriate experimental designs is needed to ensure that conservation actions are appropriately focused and are supported with robust results. Such actions will go a long way towards resolving the debate about the role of dingoes in conservation in Australia, and other, ecological debates.

As delphinid populations become increasingly exposed to human activities we rely on our capacity to produce accurate abundance estimates upon which to base management decisions. This study applied mark-recapture methods following the Robust Design to estimate abundance, demographic parameters, and temporary emigration rates of an Indo-Pacific bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops aduncus) population off Bunbury, Western Australia. Boat-based photo-identification surveys were conducted year-round over three consecutive years along pre-determined transect lines to create a consistent sampling effort throughout the study period and area. The best fitting capture-recapture model showed a population with a seasonal Markovian temporary emigration with time varying survival and capture probabilities. Abundance estimates were seasonally dependent with consistently lower numbers obtained during winter and higher during summer and autumn across the three-year study period. Specifically, abundance estimates for all adults and juveniles (combined) varied from a low of 63 (95% CI 59 to 73) in winter of 2007 to a high of 139 (95% CI 134 to148) in autumn of 2009. Temporary emigration rates (c') for animals absent in the previous period ranged from 0.34 to 0.97 (mean = 0.54; 6SE 0.11) with a peak during spring. Temporary emigration rates for animals present during the previous period (c'') were lower, ranging from 0.00 to 0.29, with a mean of 0.16 (6 SE 0.04). This model yielded a mean apparent survival estimate for juveniles and adults (combined) of 0.95 (6 SE 0.02) and a capture probability from 0.07 to 0.51 with a mean of 0.30 (6 SE 0.04). This study demonstrates the importance of incorporating temporary emigration to accurately estimate abundance of coastal delphinids. Temporary emigration rates were high in this study, despite the large area surveyed, indicating the challenges of sampling highly mobile animals which range over large spatial areas.