No abstract

The availability of affordable ‘recreational’ camera traps has dramatically increased over the last decade. We present survey results which show that many conservation practitioners use cheaper ‘recreational’ units for research rather than more expensive ‘professional’ equipment. We present our perspective of using two popular models of ‘recreational’ camera trap for ecological field-based studies. The models used (for >2 years) presented us with a range of practical problems at all stages of their use including deployment, operation, and data management, which collectively crippled data collection and limited opportunities for quantification of key issues arising. Our experiences demonstrate that prospective users need to have a sufficient understanding of the limitations camera trap technology poses, dimensions we communicate here. While the merits of different camera traps will be study specific, the performance of more expensive ‘professional’ models may prove more cost-effective in the long-term when using camera traps for research.

No abstract

Mountain hare populations in Scotland exhibit regular 10 year fluctuations in abundance. Simple models of host-parasite population dynamics suggest that parasite-mediated reductions in host fecundity can cause a transition from stable to cyclic host population dynamics. We tested the hypothesis that parasites reduce hare fecundity by experimentally reducing parasite burdens and recording female survival, body condition and fecundity. We captured 41 adult female hares in October 2002; 22 were treated with Ivermectin to remove parasites and 19 were left untreated as controls. The treated and untreated hares were culled in May 2003 together with a second control group of nine unhandled hares. Treatment with Ivermectin significantly reduced the abundance of Trichostrongylus retortaeformis and increased-the fecundity of the hares, but had no measurable effect on body condition or over-winter survival. These results are consistent with the hypothesis that parasites may be a contributory cause of cycles in populations of mountain hares.

Summary1. Culling wildlife hosts is often implemented as a management technique to control pathogen transmission from wildlife to domestic or other economically important animals. However, culling may have unexpected consequences, can be expensive and may have wider implications for biodiversity and ecosystem functioning. 2. We assess the evidence that culling mountain hares Lepus timidus is an effective and practical way to control louping ill virus in red grouse Lagopus lagopus scoticus. 3. Evidence from the available literature is limited, restricting our ability to reliably assess the effectiveness of culling mountain hares to control ticks, louping ill virus, or increase red grouse densities. Furthermore, the information required to assess the cost-benefit of this management strategy is lacking. The population response of mountain hares to culling is not well understood and the possible effects on their conservation status and the upland ecosystem remain unexplored. 4. We conclude that there is no compelling evidence base to suggest culling mountain hares might increase red grouse densities. 5. Synthesis and applications. Widespread culling of wildlife is not necessarily effective in reducing disease or improving economic returns. The use of wildlife culls for disease control should be proposed only when: (i) the pathogen transmission cycle is fully understood with all host-vector interactions considered; (ii) the response of wildlife populations to culling is known; and (iii) costbenefit analysis shows that increased revenue from reduced disease prevalence exceeds the cost of culling.

A questionnaire survey of land owners, managers and gamekeepers was conducted in order to assess the distribution of mountain hares in Scotland, assess their current management, collate numbers harvested in 2006-07 and estimate distribution change by comparing with similar data collected in 1995-96. The land area covered by returned questionnaires was 71098km 2 (90% of Scotland). Mountain hares were reported as present on 34359km 2 (48%) and absent from 36739km 2 (52%). Mountain hare presence was strongly associated with heather moorland managed for red grouse shooting. Moorland managed for driven grouse shooting had the highest percentage area of mountain hare presence (median 64%) followed by moorland managed for walked-up grouse shooting (median 9%) and moorland with no grouse shooting (median 0%). Approximately 25000 mountain hares were harvested in 2006-07. Based on the estimated UK population in 1995 of 350000 (range Ϯ50%), this represents around 7% of the population (range 5-14%). Reasons given by respondents for harvesting hares were tick control (50%), sport (40%) and forestry or crop protection (10%). Comparison of the estates surveyed in both 2006-07 and 1995-96 (a total area of 20462km 2 ) indicated no net gain or loss in hare distribution. Furthermore, there was no evidence that levels of harvest had reduced the range of mountain hares in this area. It is not possible to comment on any distribution change *Correspondence author. †Present address: Scottish Natural Heritage, Caspian House, Clydebank Business Park, Clydebank, G81 2NR, UK. ‡This work was published after the untimely death of Simon, who spent many happy hours on Scottish moorlands with family and friends. He is missed by all who worked with him and benefitted from his strong and balanced views on upland conservation. outside this area (58737km 2 ). Similarly, as no data were collected on abundance, it is not possible to draw conclusions on changes in density. Regular monitoring of mountain hare distribution within Scotland is required to identify any distribution changes. Measures of abundance throughout the range are necessary to estimate the population size, investigate the relationship between harvest intensity and changes in abundance and further assess the conservation status of this UK Biodiversity Action Plan species.

The widespread availability of relatively cheap, reliable and easy to use digital camera traps has led to their extensive use for wildlife research, monitoring and public outreach. Users of these units are, however, often frustrated by the limited options for controlling camera functions, the generation of large numbers of images, and the lack of flexibility to suit different research environments and questions. We describe the development of a user-customisable open source camera trap platform named ‘WiseEye’, designed to provide flexible camera trap technology for wildlife researchers. The novel platform is based on a Raspberry Pi single-board computer and compatible peripherals that allow the user to control its functions and performance. We introduce the concept of confirmatory sensing, in which the Passive Infrared triggering is confirmed through other modalities (i.e. radar, pixel change) to reduce the occurrence of false positives images. This concept, together with user-definable metadata, aided identification of spurious images and greatly reduced post-collection processing time. When tested against a commercial camera trap, WiseEye was found to reduce the incidence of false positive images and false negatives across a range of test conditions. WiseEye represents a step-change in camera trap functionality, greatly increasing the value of this technology for wildlife research and conservation management.

No abstract