An evaluation of monitoring methods for the endangered giant kangaroo rat
Abstract Accurate, reliable, and efficient monitoring methods for detecting changes in the distribution and abundance of wildlife populations are the cornerstone of effective management. Aerial surveys of active burrow sites and ground counts of open burrows have been used to estimate distribution a...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Wiley
2012-09-01
|
| Series: | Wildlife Society Bulletin |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1002/wsb.171 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1846120370415861760 |
|---|---|
| author | William T. Bean Robert Stafford Laura R. Prugh H. Scott Butterfield Justin S. Brashares |
| author_facet | William T. Bean Robert Stafford Laura R. Prugh H. Scott Butterfield Justin S. Brashares |
| author_sort | William T. Bean |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Abstract Accurate, reliable, and efficient monitoring methods for detecting changes in the distribution and abundance of wildlife populations are the cornerstone of effective management. Aerial surveys of active burrow sites and ground counts of open burrows have been used to estimate distribution and abundance, respectively, of a number of rodent species. We compared the efficacy of these and other methods for estimating distribution, abundance, and population growth of the endangered giant kangaroo rat (Dipodomys ingens) to determine the best practices for monitoring. Specifically, we compared aerial surveys, rapid expert assessments, and live‐trapping for estimating giant kangaroo rat range, and burrow counts and live‐trapping for estimating abundance and growth. We carried out the study in the Carrizo Plain National Monument, California, USA, from 2007 to 2011. Expert rapid assessment of sites performed nearly as well as trapping in determining range extent, while aerial surveys provided estimates of total range extent but with less precision. Active burrow counts were adequate to determine relative abundance averaged over multiple years, but were not reliable as an estimate of annual population size or growth. © 2012 The Wildlife Society. |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-8861e44a8fc94539b03f4f69051a968a |
| institution | Kabale University |
| issn | 2328-5540 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2012-09-01 |
| publisher | Wiley |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Wildlife Society Bulletin |
| spelling | doaj-art-8861e44a8fc94539b03f4f69051a968a2024-12-16T11:30:52ZengWileyWildlife Society Bulletin2328-55402012-09-0136358759310.1002/wsb.171An evaluation of monitoring methods for the endangered giant kangaroo ratWilliam T. Bean0Robert Stafford1Laura R. Prugh2H. Scott Butterfield3Justin S. Brashares4Environmental Science, Policy & Management and Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, University of California, 130 Mulford Hall, Berkeley, CA 94720, USACalifornia Department of Fish & Game, P.O. Box 6360, Los Osos, CA 93412, USABiology and Wildlife Department, University of Alaska Fairbanks, Fairbanks, AK 99775, USAThe Nature Conservancy, 201 Mission Street 4th Floor, San Francisco, CA 94105, USAEnvironmental Science, Policy & Management, University of California, 130 Mulford Hall, Berkeley, CA 94720, USAAbstract Accurate, reliable, and efficient monitoring methods for detecting changes in the distribution and abundance of wildlife populations are the cornerstone of effective management. Aerial surveys of active burrow sites and ground counts of open burrows have been used to estimate distribution and abundance, respectively, of a number of rodent species. We compared the efficacy of these and other methods for estimating distribution, abundance, and population growth of the endangered giant kangaroo rat (Dipodomys ingens) to determine the best practices for monitoring. Specifically, we compared aerial surveys, rapid expert assessments, and live‐trapping for estimating giant kangaroo rat range, and burrow counts and live‐trapping for estimating abundance and growth. We carried out the study in the Carrizo Plain National Monument, California, USA, from 2007 to 2011. Expert rapid assessment of sites performed nearly as well as trapping in determining range extent, while aerial surveys provided estimates of total range extent but with less precision. Active burrow counts were adequate to determine relative abundance averaged over multiple years, but were not reliable as an estimate of annual population size or growth. © 2012 The Wildlife Society.https://doi.org/10.1002/wsb.171aerial surveysburrowing rodentDipodomys ingensgiant kangaroo ratpopulation indices |
| spellingShingle | William T. Bean Robert Stafford Laura R. Prugh H. Scott Butterfield Justin S. Brashares An evaluation of monitoring methods for the endangered giant kangaroo rat Wildlife Society Bulletin aerial surveys burrowing rodent Dipodomys ingens giant kangaroo rat population indices |
| title | An evaluation of monitoring methods for the endangered giant kangaroo rat |
| title_full | An evaluation of monitoring methods for the endangered giant kangaroo rat |
| title_fullStr | An evaluation of monitoring methods for the endangered giant kangaroo rat |
| title_full_unstemmed | An evaluation of monitoring methods for the endangered giant kangaroo rat |
| title_short | An evaluation of monitoring methods for the endangered giant kangaroo rat |
| title_sort | evaluation of monitoring methods for the endangered giant kangaroo rat |
| topic | aerial surveys burrowing rodent Dipodomys ingens giant kangaroo rat population indices |
| url | https://doi.org/10.1002/wsb.171 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT williamtbean anevaluationofmonitoringmethodsfortheendangeredgiantkangaroorat AT robertstafford anevaluationofmonitoringmethodsfortheendangeredgiantkangaroorat AT laurarprugh anevaluationofmonitoringmethodsfortheendangeredgiantkangaroorat AT hscottbutterfield anevaluationofmonitoringmethodsfortheendangeredgiantkangaroorat AT justinsbrashares anevaluationofmonitoringmethodsfortheendangeredgiantkangaroorat AT williamtbean evaluationofmonitoringmethodsfortheendangeredgiantkangaroorat AT robertstafford evaluationofmonitoringmethodsfortheendangeredgiantkangaroorat AT laurarprugh evaluationofmonitoringmethodsfortheendangeredgiantkangaroorat AT hscottbutterfield evaluationofmonitoringmethodsfortheendangeredgiantkangaroorat AT justinsbrashares evaluationofmonitoringmethodsfortheendangeredgiantkangaroorat |