Efficacy of Scent Dogs in Detecting Black-Footed Ferrets at a Reintroduction Site in South Dakota

Abstract

Endangered black-footed ferrets (Mustela nigripes) are difficult to monitor because of their nocturnal and fossorial habits, but land use and management are influenced by their potential presence. Detector dogs have been suggested as a method for determining ferret presence, although its efficacy has not been thoroughly investigated. We evaluated 2 dogs trained specifically for determining ferret presence in field evaluations conducted in black-tailed prairie dog (Cynomys ludovicianus) colonies at the Conata Basin reintroduction site in South Dakota, USA, during September and October 2003. We tested the dogs on 4 test colonies that had no record of ferret presence and 7 colonies known to have ferrets inhabiting them. One dog was 100% accurate at detecting presence and the other was between 57% and 71% successful at detecting ferrets, with neither dog falsely indicating presence when ferrets were absent. For the 2 dogs, the mean time to detect ferrets on a prairie dog colony was 21 minutes and mean search rate was 26 ha/hour. The mean time to detection on the same sites was 208 minutes for spotlight surveys and mean search rate was 1.6 ha/ hour. Although spotlight surveys are necessary for identifying population demographics, well-trained detection dogs show promise for detecting ferret presence in prairie dog colonies. (WILDLIFE SOCIETY BULLETIN 34(5):

Accuracy and efficiency of detection dogs: a powerful new tool for koala conservation and management

“…This is a preliminary assessment of this new survey method for koalas and clearly shows promising results. However, results of accuracy and efficiency of detection dogs will vary with both the dog and the handler abilities2930. This needs to be tested once additional koala scat detection dogs are operational.…”

Does a non-invasive method – latrine surveys – reveal habitat preferences of raccoon dogs and badgers?

“…Scat detection dogs have proved to be useful in this work (Wasser et al, 2004;Browne et al, 2006;Reindl-Thompson et al, 2006;Long et al, 2007a;MacKay et al, 2008). Trained dogs were more efficient in detecting carnivore species living in an area than cameras, scent stations and hair snares together (Harrison, 2006;Long et al, 2007b).…”

Wildlife detector dogs and camera traps: a comparison of techniques for detecting feral cats

“…Detector dogs have been used to search for various species of carnivores (Wasser et al 2004;Smith et al 2005;Gompper et al 2006;Reindl-Thompson et al 2006;Long et al 2007a;Dematteo et al 2009;Brown et al 2011) and rodents (Gsell et al 2010;Duggan et al 2011;Shapira et al 2011). Detection probabilities can vary widely between species (e.g.…”