Home Nature New Methods for Measuring the Density and Amount of Wildlife In Africa

New Methods for Measuring the Density and Amount of Wildlife In Africa


The “Anthropocene,” the name given to the current geological period because of how significantly people are affecting our planet, attempts to stop or reverse the continuous biodiversity loss and ecological collapse caused by the crushing weight of human pressure.

The type of hazard determines the particular conservation approach that safeguards, preserves, or restores animals and natural spaces. However, we must determine if and to what extent each sort of conservation intervention has been successful. Stable or rising animal populations are the strongest indicators of effective conservation management.

Most of the time, it is difficult to count every person in a population. Instead, of using a sample survey, wildlife monitoring continuously calculates population size, density, and dispersion. Then, management plans and initiatives may be adjusted as a result of the association between conservation interventions and trends in animal populations through time and geography. The features of the species, their habitats, and the geographical size of the studied region are taken into consideration while choosing a survey method.

Depending on the approach used, the intended metrics, as well as the local geographic and social landscapes, different people and material resources are needed — and accessible — for monitoring. It is frequently necessary to strike a compromise between very accurate population estimates that are expensive and somewhat less accurate estimates or metrics that accurately represent the scope and direction of management activity.

It is sometimes necessary to strike a compromise between highly accurate but expensive population estimates and somewhat less accurate but nonetheless significant estimates or metrics that accurately represent the scope and direction of management action.

While occupancy sampling and other methods that rely on species detection and non-detection data can be extremely flexible and cost-effective in many monitoring circumstances, they often only give information on the target species’ shifting distribution. The most useful techniques for assessing the efficacy of conservation measures are those that offer estimates of population size and density, including distance sampling and capture-recapture techniques.

By identifying the same individuals on different sampling occasions using natural markings like spots and stripes (think zebras and tigers), facial features (think chimpanzees or condors), DNA, individually recognizable calls, or capture and physical marking of individuals (typically small mammals or birds), capture-recapture estimates population size.

In order to account for the capture probability of animals when estimating the total population size, the percentage of already marked individuals captured in the second and subsequent sampling occasions is used. To put it another way, if the survey sample includes 100 animals in a given area and the capture probability is 20%, it is likely that the true population in the area is 500 animals.

“Continued scientific research enhances wildlife survey methodologies, technology aids, and analytical techniques, offering new survey possibilities for conservationists.”

When surveying unmarked individuals when it is difficult or time-consuming to tell one animal from another, distance sampling might be employed. Distances between observations are measured during distance sampling, and these distances are then used to determine the percentage of animals found during the survey, which is taken into consideration during density estimates.

In cases when the animals are uncommon, nocturnal, or elusive, the approach is also used to calculate the density of animal indicators (such as faeces and nests). Later, the density of these signs is transformed to animal density, but for this, additional, frequently expensive data on the rates of sign creation and decomposition is needed. Data from surveys may be gathered by human observers or digital tools like camera traps.

The techniques used to survey animals, as well as the available technology and analytical tools, are always being improved by ongoing scientific studies. These are a continuing source of new surveying alternatives for conservationists. The quick development of survey techniques for creatures that cannot be uniquely identified is a great recent example.

“Density estimate of seemingly similar animals is now possible because of evolving camera trap technology and image processing techniques paired with suitable analytical upgrades.”

Density assessment of seemingly similar animals is now possible because of developing camera trap technology, image processing methods, and analytical improvements. The new techniques enable us to employ camera traps for a considerably wider range of animal species than has previously been possible. Until now, camera trap density estimate approaches have largely been used for species where individuals could be individually identified.

Conservationists can now estimate density for a wide range of species that are particularly crucial for ecosystem function: those that serve as prey for animal predators. This is made possible by developments in methodologies, technology, and analysis. The same species frequently provide as a significant supply of animal protein for rural residents who depend on natural ecosystems.

Camera trap distance sampling is one of these novel methods, used at several conservation sites across the world right now (CTDS). To collect data inside the tried-and-true distance sampling framework, this invention employs camera traps. Today, estimates of density and abundance can be found for every species that spends some of its days on the ground. These are species for whom there was previously very little knowledge on density.

From aardvarks, anteaters, Congo peacocks, and elephant shrews to giant apes, pangolins, semi-terrestrial monkeys, and all ungulates, abundance estimates may now be established for a whole A to Z of species (including Zebra duikers). This innovative conservation strategy provides access to previously impractical species evaluations.

Previous articleFour Ways USAID Encouraged Free and Fair Elections Worldwide
Next articleWe Eat Corn in Almost Everything. Here Are 9 Things You Can Get Out of Corn