If you are aware of this method, then how do you deal with fallow deer? If this method was used, but not anymore, what other methods for ungulate survey are used in your country? Are cost/effectiveness better? How you deal with the problem of repeated count? See Alves et al., 2012 "Pellet group count methods to estimate red deer densities: Precision, potential accuracy and efficiency" in Mammalian biology.
I forget to mention, that problematic are winters, when there is short snow cover - what then? Use recalculations - adding coefficients depending on the length odf snowy season?
This is being done experimentally for forest-dwelling feral horses in Australia and some exploratory efforts in the US, with consideration of fecal decomposition state to categorize age (and thus reduce redundant counts). For the most part the fecal count idea has been transforming in the US to be a genetic mark-resight endeavor.
we used the method during the 1970's in South Africa to estimate Blue Duiker populations in dense natural forests, The uncertainties were due to sampling error and estimation of pellet weathering rates:
Gadow, K. v., 1978: A pellet group count of blue duiker and bushbuck in the Knysna forests. S. Afr. For. J. 107: 77-81.
We are currently, in Utah U.S., using fecal counts in conjunction with camera traps in order to have ungulate population indexes (red deer, mule deer), as part of my dissertation. Camera traps are a lot easier to maintain, and are very effective. However, you need to buy the best available cameras in order for my last statement to be true ~600 USD each. If you have the available funding, or if you have few sites, cameras are the way to go. Otherwise, I find pellet counts to be cost effective if labor is cheap (Like with graduate students, haha!)
Hello, Aaron, I would like to know more on your design. You perhaps use Reconyx cameras? So far I have 20 Acorn, and it seems they also are working ok. How many cameras per 1000 ha or per 1 sq km you use?
Hi Linas,
We have an experimental fencing treatment that excludes particular ungulates. We want to evaluate differential impacts of ungulate species, and their relative/absolute abundances on plant community development/ forest regeneration after fire. We have four levels of the fencing treatment: a fence with a 0.5m gap that allows access to deer only, a cattle fence that excludes cattle but allows deer and red deer to jump over, and a full fence that excludes all ungulates. There is also a no-fence plot.
We use reconyx PC900 Hyperfire to capture the activity within the fenced area, which is only a 30x30m area. We want to know relative activity of each ungulate in the fenced area, and also confirm that our fencing design is working. We have 40 plots/40 cameras. We lose about 1 camera a year to theft.
Estimating animal density is not a goal of the experiment (It is obviously very hard to do with large migratory animals and outside the scope of my dissertation).
Not something I know much about but the method is used in New Zealand where we have multiple (pest) ungulates. A protocol for counts with additional references can be found at http://www.doc.govt.nz/Documents/science-and-technical/inventory-monitoring/im-toolbox-animal-pests-faecal-pellet-counts.pdf
Hi Linas. For get a precise results, I´ve used spatial capture-recapture to estimate the male roe deer population (you can find the link attached, sorry, in spanish!). You can identify the males without problems. If you want estimate the whole population (males and females) maybe you could use Spatial Mark-Resight Models (SMR). Using this model you can calculate the population only with identification of a small fraction of the total.
Roe deer link:
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/236677110_Estima_de_una_poblacin_de_corzo_mediante_modelos_de_captura-_recaptura_clsicos_y_espacialmente_explcitos
SMR example: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23687880
Article Estima de una población de corzo mediante modelos de captura...
Jose, thank you, I will see later. Tomorrow leaving to Santiago de camino, northern way, for a month. so maybe after I will be more fluent in Spanish? Because now - nada, senor.
Not easy! But maybe you can understand the R+JAGS code in the supplement of the article.
Enjoy your stay in Spain. The "Camino de Santiago" is a very pretty way to know the North of our country.
Pellet counts have never been designed to assess animal abundance - past studies on ungulates have demonstrated that the rate of defecation varied among seasons (with a change of diet), and a reliable index cannot be developed. On the other hand, pellet surveys, and other techniques such as track counts in winter, can be used to establish the distribution of a species and determine preference or avoidance of habitats. Once preferred habitats have been identified, then one can use other survey techniques The (e.g., aerial counts, camera traps) to estimate population size. Track counts/km of survey transect can be used, however, to approximate the relative abundance of animals.
We have a range of survey techniques here in the Scottish highlands, specifically to count and manage red deer populations. Guidance from Scottish Natural Heritage (SNH) at https://www.bestpracticeguides.org.uk/reference is a good place to start.
We manage deer here via Deer management Groups or DMG's, and there is an association that oversees all of them and acts as a mediator between landowners and the government and NGO's.
Our terrain is for the most part very open, so helicopter counting (every three years is recommended) is regarded by most observers as the most accurate methodology for identifying populations. This is then followed by spring recruitment counts of calves to see how many have survived from the previous year. This usually runs anywhere from 15% in the Highlands up to around 55% in lowland woodlands.
Deer group members across Scotland have this year all had to produce plans to a certified standard which have to be made available through the ADMG website at http://www.deer-management.co.uk/links/. If you have a look at a spread of plans you should get a feel for how counting is carried out here.
For us in Scotland for the most part the expectation is that deer numbers have to be kept at around 12 to 15 deer/km2. This can obviously vary depending on the terrain and available feeding, but there is ample Scottish literature to keep you busy on this subject I'm sure.
- Badges
- Science method
- Similar topics
- Biological Science
- Ecology