Mark‐Recapture Distance Sampling for Aerial Surveys of Ungulates on Rangelands

2020 ◽  
Vol 44 (4) ◽  
pp. 713-723
Author(s):  
Mary K. Peterson ◽  
Aaron M. Foley ◽  
Andrew N. Tri ◽  
David G. Hewitt ◽  
Randy W. DeYoung ◽  
...  

2008 ◽  
Vol 35 (4) ◽  
pp. 320 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rachel M. Fewster ◽  
Anthony R. Pople

Aerial surveys of kangaroos (Macropus spp.) in Queensland are used to make economically important judgements on the levels of viable commercial harvest. Previous analysis methods for aerial kangaroo surveys have used both mark–recapture methodologies and conventional distance-sampling analyses. Conventional distance sampling has the disadvantage that detection is assumed to be perfect on the transect line, while mark–recapture methods are notoriously sensitive to problems with unmodelled heterogeneity in capture probabilities. We introduce three methodologies for combining together mark–recapture and distance-sampling data, aimed at exploiting the strengths of both methodologies and overcoming the weaknesses. Of these methods, two are based on the assumption of full independence between observers in the mark–recapture component, and this appears to introduce more bias in density estimation than it resolves through allowing uncertain trackline detection. Both of these methods give lower density estimates than conventional distance sampling, indicating a clear failure of the independence assumption. The third method, termed point independence, appears to perform very well, giving credible density estimates and good properties in terms of goodness-of-fit and percentage coefficient of variation. Estimated densities of eastern grey kangaroos range from 21 to 36 individuals km–2, with estimated coefficients of variation between 11% and 14% and estimated trackline detection probabilities primarily between 0.7 and 0.9.



2008 ◽  
Vol 35 (4) ◽  
pp. 275 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rachel M. Fewster ◽  
Colin Southwell ◽  
David L. Borchers ◽  
Stephen T. Buckland ◽  
Anthony R. Pople

Line-transect distance sampling is a widely used method for estimating animal density from aerial surveys. Analysis of line-transect distance data usually relies on a requirement that the statistical distribution of distances of animal groups from the transect line is uniform. We show that this requirement is satisfied by the survey design if all other assumptions of distance sampling hold, but it can be violated by consistent survey problems such as responsive movement of the animals towards or away from the observer. We hypothesise that problems with the uniform requirement are unlikely to be encountered for immobile taxa, but might become substantial for species of high mobility. We test evidence for non-uniformity using double-observer distance data from two aerial surveys of five species with a spectrum of mobility capabilities and tendencies. No clear evidence against uniformity was found for crabeater seals or emperor penguins on the pack-ice in East Antarctica, while minor non-uniformity consistent with responsive movement up to 30 m was found for Adelie penguins. Strong evidence of either non-uniformity or a failure of the capture–recapture validating method was found for eastern grey kangaroos and red kangaroos in Queensland.



2014 ◽  
Vol 5 (11) ◽  
pp. 1180-1191 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mary Louise Burt ◽  
David L. Borchers ◽  
Kurt J. Jenkins ◽  
Tiago A. Marques


2008 ◽  
Vol 35 (4) ◽  
pp. 365 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michelle J. Dawson ◽  
Cameron Miller

Aerial mark–recapture population estimates utilising the natural markings of wild horses to identify individuals was applied in the Bogong High Plains, Alpine National Park, Victoria. A discrete population of wild horses occupying an area of 180 km2 was sampled over two days in 2005. This study explored the feasibility of a technique that aimed to enable managers to estimate the size of the horse population and monitor it over time. Four observers (including the pilot) searched for horses from a helicopter. Once horses were sighted, photographic and written observations were used to ‘mark’ each animal. The survey was repeated the following day with observations ‘recapturing’ individuals. Data were analysed using several mark–recapture estimators, and the derived population estimates ranged from 89 (±5.3, s.e.) horses to 94.7 (±7.9, s.e.) horses. We found that the method gave a level of precision relevant to management, but needs refinement. The technique and its assumptions should be tested further by increasing the number of samples and video should be used to improve identification of individuals. We believe that this is a novel application for aerial surveys, which are typically unsuitable for estimating the size of small populations. This technique was developed for horses but may be used on other conspicuous species with unique natural markings.



2017 ◽  
Vol 11 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 133-143 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fábio G. Daura-Jorge ◽  
Paulo César Simões-Lopes

Cetacean populations in coastal habitats are increasingly threatened by multiple anthropogenic impacts. Monitoring these populations to obtain robust estimates of abundance and detect trends over time is critical to achieve conservation goals. Here, we conducted a pilot study to evaluate the effectiveness of two commonly used abundance estimation methods: mark-recapture and distance sampling line-transect. Surveys were conducted to estimate the abundance of bottlenose dolphins in Laguna, southern Brazil. We implemented power-analysis models and compared both techniques in terms of cost, time and effectiveness to detect trends over a five-year period. Mark-recapture models were analyzed in MARK and resulted in an abundance of 50 individuals (CI = 39-64) with a coefficient of variation (CV) of 0.13. The line-transect models were implemented using the program DISTANCE and resulted in an estimate of 62 individuals (CI = 38-103), with a CV of 0.24. Comparing both approaches, mark-recapture resulted 1.30 time more expensive than line-transect for a single season of effort, but was twice as effective in terms of precision. As a consequence, the probability of detecting a 5% trend during a five-year period is 2.08 times higher with mark recapture. Conversely, the final cost to detect a trend with distance sampling is 1.19 time higher but considering six more years of effort. These results highlight the importance of selecting a-priori sampling design techniques that include developing pilot studies that evaluate the bias, precision and accuracy of estimates while considering costs involved. Considering the small population size estimated herein, the sensitivity of both approaches for detecting trends is not sufficient because the original population would be markedly reduced by the time a declining trend was detected. Thus, a precautionary approach is still imperative, even when robust estimates are obtained.



2012 ◽  
Vol 36 (1) ◽  
pp. 100-106 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rachael E. Urbanek ◽  
Clayton K. Nielsen ◽  
Timothy S. Preuss ◽  
Gary A. Glowacki


2017 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 354-362 ◽  
Author(s):  
Olivia N. P. Hamilton ◽  
Sophie E. Kincaid ◽  
Rochelle Constantine ◽  
Lily Kozmian‐Ledward ◽  
Cameron G. Walker ◽  
...  


2008 ◽  
Vol 35 (4) ◽  
pp. 310 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gavin J. Melville ◽  
John P. Tracey ◽  
Peter J. S. Fleming ◽  
Brian S. Lukins

Recent developments in the application of line-transect models to aerial surveys have used double-observer sampling to account for undercounting on the transect line, a crucial step in obtaining correct population estimates. This method is commonly called the mark–recapture line-transect sampling method and estimates the detection probability at zero distance to correct line-transect estimates of abundance. An alternative approach, which uses the same methodology during data collection, is to use a range of covariates, including distance from the transect, in a mark–recapture model. This approach overcomes the implicit assumption of uniform distribution of distances in line-transect estimators. In this paper, we use three alternative approaches (a multiple-covariates distance method, a distance method incorporating adjustment for incomplete detection on the transect line using mark–recapture sampling, and a mark–recapture method with distance as a covariate) to estimate the abundance of several medium-sized mammals in semiarid ecosystems. Densities determined with the three estimators varied considerably within species and sites. In some cases distance estimates were larger than mark–recapture estimates and vice versa. Despite large numbers of observations, distance uniformity was not observed for any species at any site, nor for any species where sites were combined. Possible reasons, which include sampling variability, movement in response to the aircraft and failure of the mark–recapture independence assumption, are discussed in detail.



2018 ◽  
Vol 82 (8) ◽  
pp. 1668-1679 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jared H. Oyster ◽  
Ilai N. Keren ◽  
Sara J.K. Hansen ◽  
Richard B. Harris


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document