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

Glen, Alistair S.; Anderson, Dean P.; Veltman, CJ; Garvey, PM; Nichols, Margaret

doi:10.1080/03014223.2015.1103761

Cited by 25 publications

(32 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, further research is required to understand the disturbance effects of remote cameras on animals, especially on small-and medium-sized mammals. Other drawbacks associated with cameras include privacy issues, vandalism and theft (Glen et al 2016), although in our study no such instances occurred.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 38%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Evaluation of remote cameras for monitoring multiple invasive mammals in New Zealand

Hartley¹,

Wittmer²

2018

NZ J Ecol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Numerous conservation projects in New Zealand aim to reduce populations of invasive mammalian predators to facilitate the recovery of native species. However, results of control efforts are often uncertain due to insufficient monitoring. Remote cameras have the potential to monitor multiple species of invasive mammals. To determine the efficiency of cameras as a multi-species monitoring tool, we compared the detection rates of remote cameras and tracking tunnels over 4 non-consecutive days across 40 sites in Wellington. On average, cameras detected significantly more hedgehogs (Erinaceus europaeus) and rats (Rattus spp.) than tracking tunnels, and their images could be used to identify rats to the species level in 50% of detections. Cameras also detected more possums (Trichosurus vulpecula) but missed recording mice (Mus musculus) on some occasions where tracking tunnels detected them, and vice-versa. We conclude that remote cameras are well-suited for simultaneously monitoring multiple species of invasive mammals in New Zealand.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 38%

“…body size and speed) and environmental conditions (Rowcliffe et al 2011;Nichols et al 2017). In New Zealand, remote cameras have successfully been used to monitor feral cats (Felis catus) and European rabbits (Oryctolagus cuniculus), as well as interspecific interactions at bait stations (Sam 2011;Latham et al 2012;Glen et al 2016).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of remote cameras for monitoring multiple invasive mammals in New Zealand

Hartley¹,

Wittmer²

2018

NZ J Ecol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…2015; Glen et al. 2016). Summarizing project costs in terms of project objectives (e.g., cost per scat) is interesting (Arandjelovic et al.…”

Section: Evaluation Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Reporting costs provides an understanding of the financial and logistical investment required to use detection dogs and should be considered over the lifetime of the dog when purchasing rather than leasing. Where expenses are itemized in categories, com-parisons with alternative techniques and other studies are possible (Clare et al 2015;Glen et al 2016). Summarizing project costs in terms of project objectives (e.g., cost per scat) is interesting (Arandjelovic et al 2015;Orkin et al 2016), but for comparative purposes it is perhaps more useful to report in terms of achievement (total project cost, total area surveyed, probability of detection).…”

Section: Cost Considerationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluating conservation dogs in the search for rare species

Bennett

Hauser

Moore

2020

Conservation Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Detecting rare species is important for both threatened species management and invasive species eradication programs. Conservation scent dogs provide an olfactory survey tool that has advantages over traditional visual and auditory survey techniques for some cryptic species. From the literature, we identified 5 measures important in evaluating the use of scent dogs: precision, sensitivity, effort, cost, and comparison with other techniques. We explored the scale at which performance is evaluated and examined when field testing under real working conditions is achievable. We also identified cost differences among studies. We examined 61 studies published in 1976–2018 that reported conservation dog performance, and considered the inconsistencies in the reporting of scent dog performance among these studies. The majority of studies reported some measure of performance; however, only 8 studies reported all 3 aspects necessary for performance evaluation: precision, sensitivity, and effort. Although effort was considered in 43 studies, inconsistent methods and incomplete reporting prevented meaningful evaluation of performance and comparison among studies. Differences in cost between similar studies were influenced by geographical location and how the dog and handler were sourced for the study. To develop consistent reporting for evaluation, we recommend adoption of sensitivity, precision, and effort as standard performance measures. We recommend reporting effort as the total area and total time spent searching and reporting sensitivity and precision as proportions of the sample size. Additionally, reporting of costs, survey objectives, dog training and experience, type of detection task, and human influences will provide better opportunities for comparison within and among studies.

show abstract

“…Initially used to detect scat and other signs of cryptic endangered species (Reindl-Thompson et al 2006), detector dogs are now accomplishing numerous other conservation tasks, including detection of birds killed by striking windows and other infrastructure (Homan et al 2001), illegally trafficked animal parts, and invasive species. Not surprisingly, dogs have been used most frequently and successfully to detect invasive mammals, including feral cats (Felis catus), nutria (Myocastor coypus), and the small Indian mongoose (Herpestes javanicus) (Fukuhara et al 2010;Kendrot 2011;Glen et al 2016). Detector dogs have also successfully located a variety of other invasive taxa, including Dreissenid mussels (see http://www.musseldogs.info, accessed 30 October 2019), brown tree snakes, Burmese pythons (Python bivittatus) (Savidge et al 2011;Avery et al 2014), insects (Lin et al 2011;Lee et al 2014), and even invasive plants (Goodwin et al 2010).…”

Section: Chemical Detectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Technology innovation: advancing capacities for the early detection of and rapid response to invasive species

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The 2016-2018 National Invasive Species Council (NISC) Management Plan and Executive Order 13751 call for US federal agencies to foster technology development and application to address invasive species and their impacts. This paper complements and draws on an Innovation Summit, review of advanced biotechnologies applicable to invasive species management, and a survey of federal agencies that respond to these high-level directives. We provide an assessment of federal government capacities for the early detection of and rapid response to invasive species (EDRR) through advances in technology application; examples of emerging technologies for the detection, identification, reporting, and response to invasive species; and guidance for fostering further advancements in applicable technologies. Throughout the paper, we provide examples of how federal agencies are applying technologies to improve programmatic effectiveness and cost-efficiencies. We also highlight the outstanding technology-related needs identified by federal agencies to overcome barriers to enacting EDRR. Examples include improvements in research facility infrastructure, data mobilization across a wide range of invasive species parameters (from genetic to landscape scales), promotion of and support for filling key gaps in technological capacity (e.g., portable, field-ready devices with automated capacities), and greater investments in technology prizes and challenge competitions.

show abstract

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

Cited by 25 publications

References 35 publications

Evaluation of remote cameras for monitoring multiple invasive mammals in New Zealand

Evaluation of remote cameras for monitoring multiple invasive mammals in New Zealand

Evaluating conservation dogs in the search for rare species

Technology innovation: advancing capacities for the early detection of and rapid response to invasive species

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About