Take Only Photographs, Leave Only Footprints: Novel Applications of Non-Invasive Survey Methods for Rapid Detection of Small, Arboreal Animals.

The development of appropriate wildlife survey techniques is essential to promote effective and efficient monitoring of species of conservation concern. Here, we demonstrate the utility of two rapid-assessment, non-invasive methods to detect the presence of elusive, small, arboreal animals. We use the hazel dormouse, Muscardinus avellanarius, a rodent of conservation concern, as our focal species. Prevailing hazel dormouse survey methods are prolonged (often taking months to years to detect dormice), dependent on season and habitat, and/or have low detection rates. Alternatives would be of great use to ecologists who undertake dormouse surveys, especially those assessing the need for mitigation measures, as legally required for building development projects. Camera traps and footprint tracking are well-established tools for monitoring elusive large terrestrial mammals, but are rarely used for small species such as rodents, or in arboreal habitats. In trials of these adapted methods, hazel dormice visited bait stations and were successfully detected by both camera traps and tracking equipment at each of two woodland study sites, within days to weeks of installation. Camera trap images and footprints were of adequate quality to allow discrimination between two sympatric small mammal species (hazel dormouse and wood mouse, Apodemus sylvaticus). We discuss the relative merits of these methods with respect to research aims, funds, time available and habitat.

Entanglement of grey seals Halichoerus grypus at a haul out site in Cornwall, UK.

Entanglement in marine debris has been internationally recognised as a potential threat to marine species. Sightings records and a photo identification catalogue from a haul out site in southwest England were used to establish entanglement records for grey seals Halichoerus grypus. Between 2004 and 2008 the annual mean entanglement rates varied from 3.6% to 5%. The maximum recapture period for entangled seals compared to paired control seals was significantly less (p=0.045) suggesting an increased mortality rate for affected seals. Of the 58 entangled cases in the catalogue, 64% had injuries that were deemed serious. Of the 15 cases where the entangling debris was visible, 14 were entangled in fisheries materials. The entanglement reported at this site could indicate a high rate of mortality and should be monitored carefully. On a more immediate level, entanglement represents a welfare issue for the affected animals.