Search

ABSTRACT We tested whether striped skunks (Mephitis mephitis) in Flagstaff, Arizona, USA, could be recognized based on variation in pelage patterns and whether camera position influenced that outcome. We presented 11 volunteers with 2 sets of 24 photographs taken between 1 January and 15 February 2015, one with animals photographed from the side, the other from above. Each set of 24 photographs included 9 pairs, with each pair representing 2 different images of the same animal. Volunteers scored twice as many correct matches and 4‐fold fewer false matches when photographs were taken from above. Regardless of camera position, the total number of unique skunks in each set was underestimated (83% of total from above, 75% from side), likely because some skunks had very similar pelage patterns. Our results indicate that variation in nose stripe, back stripe, dorsal and ventral tail pattern, and shape of tail can be used to recognize individual striped skunks but similarity in those characteristics among some individuals may cause total number of unique individuals to be underestimated regardless of camera orientation. © 2017 The Wildlife Society.

ABSTRACT Monitoring wolf abundance is important for recovery efforts of Mexican wolves (Canis lupus baileyi) in the Blue Range Wolf Recovery Area in Arizona and New Mexico, USA. Although radiotelemetry has been a reliable method, collaring and tracking wolves in an expanding population will be prohibitively expensive and alternative methods to estimate abundance will become necessary. We applied 10 canid microsatellite loci to 235 Mexican wolf samples, 48 coyote (C. latrans) samples, and 14 domestic dog (C. lupus familiaris) samples to identify alleles that provide reliable separation of these species. We then evaluated an approach for prescreening, noninvasively collected DNA obtained from fecal samples to identify Mexican wolves. We generated complete genotypes for only those samples identified as probable Mexican wolves. We used these genotypes to estimate mark–recapture population estimates of Mexican wolves and compared these to known numbers of wolves in the study area. We collected fecal samples during 3 sampling periods in 2007–2008 and used Huggins‐type mark–recapture models to estimate Mexican wolf abundance. We were able to generate abundance estimates with 95% confidence for 2 of 3 sampling periods. We estimated abundance to be 10 (95% CI = 6–34) during one sampling period when the known abundance was 10 and we estimated abundance to be 9 (95% CI = 6–30) during the other sampling period when the known abundance was 10. The application of this noninvasive method to estimate Mexican wolf abundance provides an alternative monitoring tool that could be useful for long‐term monitoring of this and other recovering populations. Published 2016. This article is a U.S. Government work and is in the public domain in the USA.

Abstract Radiotelemetry is an important tool for wildlife management and research, but in some cases attachment of neck collars can be problematic. An alternative in large mammals is to attach transmitters to the ear, though little is published about ear‐tag radiotransmitter integrity (i.e., how long a transmitter emits a useful signal) and retention (i.e., how long a transmitter remains attached to an animal). Here we report ear‐tag transmitter integrity and retention from 2 studies monitoring free‐ranging calves (Bos taurus) in eastern Arizona, USA, and feral horse (Equus ferus) foals in northwestern Spain. Transmitter integrity and retention was lower for transmitters attached to foals then calves. The primary cause for reduced integrity was antennas breaking off, whereas the primary retention problem involved transmitters ripping out of the ear. When data were pooled across study sites, mean integrity and retention loss was 111 days and 180 days, respectively. Transmitters attached to the interior of the outer ears had retention rates >2 times higher than transmitters attached to the exterior of the outer ear (88% vs. 43%). We recommend that researchers intending to utilize ear‐tag transmitters for studies on large domestic or wild animals attach transmitters to the interior of the outer ear, reinforce transmitter antennas in order to improve integrity, and report integrity and retention rates. © 2012 The Wildlife Society.