Review: COVID-19 highlights the importance of camera traps for wildlife conservation research and management

Blount, J. David; Chynoweth, Mark William; Green, Austin M.; Şekercioğlu, Çağan H.

doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2021.108984

Cited by 27 publications

(26 citation statements)

References 166 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Further, data loss during this time was notable due to many researchers being unable to safely continue field research (Pennisi, 2020). This unexpected obstacle highlights the utility of autonomous monitoring devices like camera traps (CTs) (Blount et al, 2021), which offer a cost‐effective and non‐invasive method of collecting continuous data on both human and wildlife activities (Naidoo & Burton, 2020).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Human impacts on mammals in and around a protected area before, during, and after COVID‐19 lockdowns

Procko

Naidoo

LeMay

2022

Conservat Sci and Prac

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The dual mandate for many protected areas (PAs) to simultaneously promote recreation and conserve biodiversity may be hampered by negative effects of recreation on wildlife. However, reports of these effects are not consistent, presenting a knowledge gap that hinders evidence‐based decision‐making. We used camera traps to monitor human activity and terrestrial mammals in Golden Ears Provincial Park and the adjacent University of British Columbia Malcolm Knapp Research Forest near Vancouver, Canada, with the objective of discerning relative effects of various forms of recreation on cougars (Puma concolor), black bears (Ursus americanus), black‐tailed deer (Odocoileus hemionus), snowshoe hares (Lepus americanus), coyotes (Canis latrans), and bobcats (Lynx rufus). Additionally, public closures of the study area associated with the COVD‐19 pandemic offered an unprecedented period of human‐exclusion through which to explore these effects. Using Bayesian generalized mixed‐effects models, we detected negative effects of hikers (mean posterior estimate = −0.58, 95% credible interval [CI] −1.09 to −0.12) on weekly bobcat habitat use and negative effects of motorized vehicles (estimate = −0.28, 95% CI −0.61 to −0.05) on weekly black bear habitat use. We also found increased cougar detection rates in the PA during the COVID‐19 closure (estimate = 0.007, 95% CI 0.005 to 0.009), but decreased cougar detection rates (estimate = −0.006, 95% CI −0.009 to −0.003) and increased black‐tailed deer detection rates (estimate = 0.014, 95% CI 0.002 to 0.026) upon reopening of the PA. Our results emphasize that effects of human activity on wildlife habitat use and movement may be species‐ and/or activity‐dependent, and that camera traps can be an invaluable tool for monitoring both wildlife and human activity, collecting data even when public access is barred. Further, we encourage PA managers seeking to promote both biodiversity conservation and recreation to explicitly assess trade‐offs between these two goals in their PAs.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Human impacts on mammals in and around a protected area before, during, and after COVID‐19 lockdowns

Procko

Naidoo

LeMay

2022

Conservat Sci and Prac

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Although camera traps have been used to answer a number of important research questions and their use as wildlife monitoring tools continues to increase (Blount et al, 2021; Burton et al, 2015), it is important to note the potential limitations that can come from using this method to make inferences on multispecies habitat use (Devarajan et al, 2020). Although animal movement near a camera trap is thought to be indicative of species presence across a larger area, it is important to note that fine‐scale differences in species‐specific space use behavior and relative abundance could bias estimates of occupancy and detection probability, potentially leading to erroneous conclusions about habitat preference across species (Kays et al, 2021).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For this analysis, each site's sampling period was broken into multiple repeats of 7‐day sampling periods. We chose this period as an offset between (1) increasing the detection probability of the large‐bodied, wide‐ranging species in our study and (2) providing enough spatial replicates for accurate estimation of detection probability across species (Blount et al, 2021; Mackenzie et al, 2017; Whittington et al, 2018).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The effects of human development, environmental factors, and a major highway on mammalian community composition in the Wasatch Mountains of northern Utah, USA

Barnick

Green

Pendergast

et al. 2022

Conservat Sci and Prac

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Human development and roads threaten wildlife through distinct mechanisms and understanding the influence of these elements can better inform mitigation and conservation strategies. We used camera traps to quantify the effects of major roads, environmental factors, and human development on the mammalian community composition between sites north and south of a major interstate highway in northern Utah, USA. We found no significant differences in species richness nor community similarity across the north-south divide of the highway. Through Bayesian hierarchical modeling, we compared the effects of the distance to the highway, housing and human population density, normalized difference vegetation index (NDVI), and the human footprint index to changes in mammalian community composition and species-specific habitat usage. Community occupancy response, similarity, and species richness were negatively affected by increased housing and human population densities and positively affected by increased NDVI and decreased human footprint, whereas their response to the highway was more inconclusive. We conclude that mammalian community composition in our study area is influenced by both environmental conditions and human development while the effect of the highway was more nuanced, possibly due to the presence of a newly constructed wildlife overpass. Taken together, the lack of differences in species richness or community composition across the highway suggests that it may not currently exacerbate the effects of other anthropogenic sources of habitat fragmentation and highlights the need for additional research into humanwildlife conflict mitigation strategies. Kelsey A. Barnick and Austin M. Green contributed equally to this work and would like to be considered as co-first authors.

show abstract

“…The self‐built, Raspberry Pi‐based infrared cameras used in this study can be adapted to a wide range of contexts with minimal technical and programming skills. Further technological improvements, combined with recent computer vision technologies for automated data processing, are expected to support the more widespread application of camera traps in monitoring and applied conservation of other threatened mammals (McCallum, 2013), particularly during times with restrictions on fieldwork activity (Blount et al., 2021).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Camera traps with white flash are a minimally invasive method for long‐term bat monitoring

Krivek

Schulze

Pölöskei³

et al. 2021

Remote Sens Ecol Conserv

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Camera traps are an increasingly popular survey tool for ecological research and biodiversity conservation, but studies investigating their impact on focal individuals have been limited to only a few mammal species. In this context, echolocating bats are particularly interesting as they rely less on vision for navigation, yet show a strong negative reaction to constant illumination. At hibernacula, camera traps with white flash could offer an efficient alternative method for monitoring threatened bat species, but the potential negative impact of white flash on bat behavior is unknown. Here, we investigate the effect of camera traps emitting white flash at four hibernation sites fitted with infrared light barriers, infrared video cameras, and acoustic recorders over 16 weeks. At each site, the flash was turned off every second week. We quantified whether flash affected (1) nightly bat passes using generalized linear mixed models, (2) flight direction of entering bats using permutational multivariate analyses, and (3) latency of the first echolocation call after the camera trap trigger using randomization tests. Additionally, we quantified and corrected for the potential impact of confounding factors, such as weather and social interactions. Overall, white flash did not influence short‐ or long‐term bat activity, flight direction or echolocation behavior. A decrease in nightly bat activity was observed with an increasing proportion of hours with rain. Moreover, flight direction was affected by the presence of other bats, likely due to chasing and avoidance behavior. Our findings highlight the potential of camera traps with white flash triggered by infrared light barriers as a minimally invasive method for long‐term bat population monitoring and observation of species‐specific phenology. Such automated monitoring technologies can improve our understanding of long‐term population dynamics across a wide range of spatial‐temporal scales and taxa and consequently, contribute to data‐driven wildlife conservation and management.

show abstract

Review: COVID-19 highlights the importance of camera traps for wildlife conservation research and management

Cited by 27 publications

References 166 publications

Human impacts on mammals in and around a protected area before, during, and after COVID‐19 lockdowns

Human impacts on mammals in and around a protected area before, during, and after COVID‐19 lockdowns

The effects of human development, environmental factors, and a major highway on mammalian community composition in the Wasatch Mountains of northern Utah, USA

Camera traps with white flash are a minimally invasive method for long‐term bat monitoring

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About