Robust monitoring of the Eurasian lynxLynx lynxin the Slovak Carpathians reveals lower numbers than officially reported

Abstract

The Eurasian lynx Lynx lynx population in the Carpathian Mountains is considered to be one of the best preserved and largest in Europe and hence is a source for past and current reintroduction projects in central Europe. However, its status in Slovakia has been reported to the European Commission on the basis of hunters´ reports and expert estimates that have never been validated by a robust scientific approach. We conducted the first camera-trapping surveys to estimate the density of Eurasian lynx in Slovakia by means of spatial capture–recapture models in two reference areas during 2011–2015. We estimated population density per 100 km2 of suitable lynx habitat (posterior SD) as 0.58 ± SD 0.13 independent individuals (adults and subadults) in the Štiavnica Mountains and 0.81 ± SD 0.29 in Veľká Fatra National Park and surroundings. These are the lowest densities estimated using spatial capture–recapture models so far reported for the species, suggesting the lynx population in Slovakia is below carrying capacity. We suspect that low densities may be attributable to undetected human-caused mortality. Our results imply that official game statistics are substantially overestimated. Moreover, the lynx population in Slovakia may not be at favourable conservation status as required by the EU Habitats Directive. We therefore call for a thorough assessment of the density and trend of the Slovak Carpathian lynx population, and the establishment of a scientifically robust monitoring system.

Spatial density estimates of Eurasian lynx (Lynx lynx) in the French Jura and Vosges Mountains

“…When examining densities across study areas in the French Jura mountains, we found spatial variation between the three counties, with Doubs area having the lowest densities, Ain the highest densities, and Jura intermediate densities. Our density estimates were of similar magnitude to other lynx populations in Europe: 1.47 and 1.38 lynx/100 km 2 in the Northwestern Swiss Alps (Pesenti & Zimmermann, ), 0.58 (Štiavnica mountains) and 0.81 individuals/100 km 2 (Velká Fatra National Park) in Slovakia (Kubala et al, ) and 0.9 individuals/100 km 2 in the Bavarian Forest National Park in Germany (Weingarth et al, ).…”

“…While Kubala et al () and Pesenti and Zimmermann () used SCR models, (Weingarth et al, ) used standard capture–recapture models with HMMDM to estimate densities, which makes them difficult to compare (Gerber, Karpanty, & Kelly, ). Indeed, in other carnivore studies, the use of HMMDM also produced similar density estimates to SCR models (Pesenti & Zimmermann, ), while in others, including ours, the SCR estimates were closer to the MMDM estimates (Obbard et al, ) or intermediate between the MMDM and HMMDM estimates (Reppucci, Gardner, & Lucherini, ).…”

“…By using camera trap sampling and SCR models, we provided the first multi-site density estimates for lynx that will help in setting a baseline conservation status for the French lynx population. The While Kubala et al (2017) and Pesenti and Zimmermann (2013) used SCR models, (Weingarth et al, 2012) used standard capturerecapture models with HMMDM to estimate densities, which makes them difficult to compare (Gerber, Karpanty, & Kelly, 2012). Indeed, in other carnivore studies, the use of HMMDM also produced similar TA B L E 2 Lynx abundance and density estimates obtained from spatial and nonspatial capture-recapture analyses of camera trapping data collected in the French Jura mountains F I G U R E 2 Lynx (Lynx lynx) density maps in the French Jura mountains.…”

Genomic patterns in the widespread Eurasian lynx shaped by Late Quaternary climatic fluctuations and anthropogenic impacts

“…However, this population has not been exempted from intense direct persecution that left around 100 individuals in Romania by 1930 (Kratochvil, ), and probably similar numbers in the Slovakian part (Hell & Slamečka, ). The protection of the species in both countries in the 1930s allowed a significant recovery of the population with around 500 individuals in Romania by 1950 and 400–500 in Slovakia in the period 1960–1990 (Kubala et al, ). Similar scenarios with western fragmented and bottlenecked populations due to continued human pressure during the Holocene versus more contiguous and stable ranges in the east have also been postulated for other carnivore species such as wolf and brown bear in Europe (Adamec et al, ; Hindrikson et al, ; Pilot et al, ).…”

Trends in cheetah Acinonyx jubatus density in north‐central Namibia

“…A primary anthropogenic factor is possible changes in tolerance as a function of levels of depredation (Harmsen et al, 2017;. Ecological factors include prey availability, interspecific and intraspecific competition, mortality, seasonal changes in home range size, tenure and turnover due to interspecific and intraspecific competition or displacement, and the presence of dispersers (Durant, 1998;Fabiano, 2013;Kubala et al, 2017;Marker, Dickman, et al, 2008;Melzheimer et al, 2018;Swanson et al, 2014).…”