Search

Abstract Camera trapping has revolutionized wildlife ecology and conservation by providing automated data acquisition, leading to the accumulation of massive amounts of camera trap data worldwide. Although management and processing of camera trap‐derived Big Data are becoming increasingly solvable with the help of scalable cyber‐infrastructures, harmonization and exchange of the data remain limited, hindering its full potential. There is currently no widely accepted standard for exchanging camera trap data. The only existing proposal, “Camera Trap Metadata Standard” (CTMS), has several technical shortcomings and limited adoption. We present a new data exchange format, the Camera Trap Data Package (Camtrap DP), designed to allow users to easily exchange, harmonize and archive camera trap data at local to global scales. Camtrap DP structures camera trap data in a simple yet flexible data model consisting of three tables (Deployments, Media and Observations) that supports a wide range of camera deployment designs, classification techniques (e.g., human and AI, media‐based and event‐based) and analytical use cases, from compiling species occurrence data through distribution, occupancy and activity modeling to density estimation. The format further achieves interoperability by building upon existing standards, Frictionless Data Package in particular, which is supported by a suite of open software tools to read and validate data. Camtrap DP is the consensus of a long, in‐depth, consultation and outreach process with standard and software developers, the main existing camera trap data management platforms, major players in the field of camera trapping and the Global Biodiversity Information Facility (GBIF). Under the umbrella of the Biodiversity Information Standards (TDWG), Camtrap DP has been developed openly, collaboratively and with version control from the start. We encourage camera trapping users and developers to join the discussion and contribute to the further development and adoption of this standard.

Abstract The behavioral mechanisms by which predators encounter prey are poorly resolved. In particular, the extent to which predators engage in active search for prey versus incidentally encountering them has not been well studied in many systems and particularly not for neonate prey during the birth pulse. Parturition of many large herbivores occurs during a short and predictable temporal window in which young are highly vulnerable to predation. Our study aims to determine how a suite of carnivores responds to the seasonal pulse of newborn ungulates using contemporaneous global positioning system (GPS) locations of four species of predators and two species of prey. We used step‐selection functions to assess whether coyotes, cougars, black bears, and bobcats encountered parturient adult female ungulates more often than expected by chance in a low‐density population of mule deer and a high‐density population of elk. We then assessed whether the carnivore species that encountered parturient prey more often than expected by chance did so by shifting their habitat use toward areas with a high probability of encountering neonates. None of the four carnivore species encountered GPS‐collared parturient mule deer more often than expected by chance. By contrast, we determined that cougar and male bear movements positioned them in the proximity of GPS‐collared parturient elk more often than expected by chance which may provide evidence of searching behavior. Although both male bears and cougars exhibited behavior consistent with active search for neonates, only male bears used elk parturition habitat in a way that dynamically tracked the phenology of the elk birth pulse suggesting that maximizing encounters with juvenile elk was a motivation when selecting resources. Our results suggest that there is high interspecific and intersexual variability in foraging strategies among large mammalian predators and their prey.

Abstract Mortality site investigations of telemetered wildlife are important for cause‐specific survival analyses and understanding underlying causes of observed population dynamics. Yet, eroding ecoliteracy and a lack of quality control in data collection can lead researchers to make incorrect conclusions, which may negatively impact management decisions for wildlife populations. We reviewed a random sample of 50 peer‐reviewed studies published between 2000 and 2019 on survival and cause‐specific mortality of ungulates monitored with telemetry devices. This concise review revealed extensive variation in reporting of field procedures, with many studies omitting critical information for the cause of mortality inference. Field protocols used to investigate mortality sites and ascertain the cause of mortality are often minimally described and frequently fail to address how investigators dealt with uncertainty. We outline a step‐by‐step procedure for mortality site investigations of telemetered ungulates, including evidence that should be documented in the field. Specifically, we highlight data that can be useful to differentiate predation from scavenging and more conclusively identify the predator species that killed the ungulate. We also outline how uncertainty in identifying the cause of mortality could be acknowledged and reported. We demonstrate the importance of rigorous protocols and prompt site investigations using data from our 5‐year study on survival and cause‐specific mortality of telemetered mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus) in northern California. Over the course of our study, we visited mortality sites of neonates (n = 91) and adults (n = 23) to ascertain the cause of mortality. Rapid site visitations significantly improved the successful identification of the cause of mortality and confidence levels for neonates. We discuss the need for rigorous and standardized protocols that include measures of confidence for mortality site investigations. We invite reviewers and journal editors to encourage authors to provide supportive information associated with the identification of causes of mortality, including uncertainty.

Camera trapping has become an increasingly widespread tool for wildlife ecologists, with large numbers of studies relying on photo capture rates or presence/absence information. It is increasingly clear that camera placement can directly impact this kind of data, yet these biases are poorly understood. We used a paired camera design to investigate the effect of small-scale habitat features on species richness estimates, and capture rate and detection probability of several mammal species in the Shenandoah Valley of Virginia, USA. Cameras were deployed at either log features or on game trails with a paired camera at a nearby random location. Overall capture rates were significantly higher at trail and log cameras compared to their paired random cameras, and some species showed capture rates as much as 9.7 times greater at feature-based cameras. We recorded more species at both log (17) and trail features (15) than at their paired control cameras (13 and 12 species, respectively), yet richness estimates were indistinguishable after 659 and 385 camera nights of survey effort, respectively. We detected significant increases (ranging from 11-33%) in detection probability for five species resulting from the presence of game trails. For six species detection probability was also influenced by the presence of a log feature. This bias was most pronounced for the three rodents investigated, where in all cases detection probability was substantially higher (24.9-38.2%) at log cameras. Our results indicate that small-scale factors, including the presence of game trails and other features, can have significant impacts on species detection when camera traps are employed. Significant biases may result if the presence and quality of these features are not documented and either incorporated into analytical procedures, or controlled for in study design.