Camera trap sampling protocols for open landscapes: The value of time‐lapse imagery

• Published in: Conservation science and practice 2024-03, Vol.6 (3), p.n/a
• Main Authors: Leorna, Scott, Brinkman, Todd
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Animals; arctic; best‐practices; Cameras; Caribou; Coastal plains; Computed tomography; Data collection; Data processing; Data storage; Motion detection; Motion perception; remote sensing; Sampling; sampling design; trail camera; Wildlife
• ISSN: 2578-4854; 2578-4854
• DOI: 10.1111/csp2.13094

Camera traps (CT) have been used to study a wide diversity of wildlife around the world. However, despite their widespread use, standardized protocols are lacking, potentially leading to reduced efficiency and inhibiting study comparisons, generalizability, and repeatability. While there are general guidelines and considerations researchers should be aware of when designing a CT survey, studies have shown the vital importance of selecting sampling schemes and camera settings tailored to specific characteristics of the wildlife system of interest. For many species and regions, optimal sampling protocols have not been thoroughly evaluated, especially in vast open landscapes. We used CT data on barren‐ground caribou (Rangifer tarandus) in the open landscape of arctic Alaska as a case study to evaluate and quantify the influence of camera trigger type (i.e., motion detection vs. time‐lapse) and time‐lapse interval on data generation to inform sampling protocols for future CT research in this system or others like it. Comparing camera trigger types, we found 5 min interval time‐lapse generated seven‐times more images containing caribou compared to motion detection. However, the detection rate of motion detection was over 11‐times greater than time‐lapse resulting in more efficient data collection with respect to camera battery life, data storage, and data processing time. Exploring the effect of time‐lapse interval length, we found detections were highly sensitive to interval length with a 30 min interval producing 33.7% fewer images containing caribou and identifying 22.2% fewer trap days containing caribou compared to a 5 min interval. Our results provide insight into effective CT sampling protocols for open landscapes and highlight the importance of critically evaluating and selecting camera settings that account for characteristics of the study system to ensure adequate data is generated efficiently to address study objectives. To better understand effective camera trap sampling protocols for open landscapes, we used camera trap data on caribou (Rangifer tarandus) collected in arctic Alaska, USA as a case study to evaluate and quantify the influence of camera trigger type (i.e., motion detection vs. time‐lapse) and time‐lapse interval on data generation. In our system, we found 5 min interval time‐lapse contributed seven‐times more images containing caribou accounting for almost three‐times more caribou trap days compared to motion detection, however, due t