Monitoring trends in sea turtle populations: walk or fly?

Monitoring animal populations is essential to conservation, and complex monitoring goals require complex resources. Variable detection probabilities can create uncertainty in trends and abundances estimated from point count surveys (e.g. nest counts), as well as from more expensive monitoring method...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Warden, ML, Haas, HL, Richards, PM, Rose, KA, Hatch, JM
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Inter-Research 2017-11-01
Series:Endangered Species Research
Online Access:https://www.int-res.com/abstracts/esr/v34/p323-337/
id doaj-5894f70acc1541c3b722d7f921e18682
record_format Article
spelling doaj-5894f70acc1541c3b722d7f921e186822020-11-25T02:31:33ZengInter-ResearchEndangered Species Research1863-54071613-47962017-11-013432333710.3354/esr00855Monitoring trends in sea turtle populations: walk or fly?Warden, MLHaas, HLRichards, PMRose, KAHatch, JMMonitoring animal populations is essential to conservation, and complex monitoring goals require complex resources. Variable detection probabilities can create uncertainty in trends and abundances estimated from point count surveys (e.g. nest counts), as well as from more expensive monitoring methods such as line transect surveys (e.g. aerial surveys). Point count surveys in the form of nest counts are the most common form of sea turtle population monitoring, although in-water aerial surveys are also conducted. We used a loggerhead sea turtle Caretta caretta population model to generate stochastic ‘known’ populations from which we mimicked the information we would obtain from nest counts and from in-water aerial surveys. We subjected the populations to environmental or anthropogenic impacts and compared trends in each monitoring metric with the trend in simulated turtle population size in terms of adult equivalents. Over long time frames, either monitoring scheme performed equally well (mean population growth rates λ over 50 yr were within 1% of the growth rate estimated from simulated adult equivalents). Over shorter time frames, total adult females estimated from simulated nest counts generally tracked closer to adult equivalents than did abundance estimated from simulated aerial surveys; and λ for the nest count metric generally had a lower median absolute relative error. Aerial surveys added value if population impacts affected young turtles (which can take 20-30 yr to become nesters) or if impacts changed the population structure (e.g. changed the stable age distribution). For effective monitoring over short time frames, both monitoring schemes might be warranted.https://www.int-res.com/abstracts/esr/v34/p323-337/
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Warden, ML
Haas, HL
Richards, PM
Rose, KA
Hatch, JM
spellingShingle Warden, ML
Haas, HL
Richards, PM
Rose, KA
Hatch, JM
Monitoring trends in sea turtle populations: walk or fly?
Endangered Species Research
author_facet Warden, ML
Haas, HL
Richards, PM
Rose, KA
Hatch, JM
author_sort Warden, ML
title Monitoring trends in sea turtle populations: walk or fly?
title_short Monitoring trends in sea turtle populations: walk or fly?
title_full Monitoring trends in sea turtle populations: walk or fly?
title_fullStr Monitoring trends in sea turtle populations: walk or fly?
title_full_unstemmed Monitoring trends in sea turtle populations: walk or fly?
title_sort monitoring trends in sea turtle populations: walk or fly?
publisher Inter-Research
series Endangered Species Research
issn 1863-5407
1613-4796
publishDate 2017-11-01
description Monitoring animal populations is essential to conservation, and complex monitoring goals require complex resources. Variable detection probabilities can create uncertainty in trends and abundances estimated from point count surveys (e.g. nest counts), as well as from more expensive monitoring methods such as line transect surveys (e.g. aerial surveys). Point count surveys in the form of nest counts are the most common form of sea turtle population monitoring, although in-water aerial surveys are also conducted. We used a loggerhead sea turtle Caretta caretta population model to generate stochastic ‘known’ populations from which we mimicked the information we would obtain from nest counts and from in-water aerial surveys. We subjected the populations to environmental or anthropogenic impacts and compared trends in each monitoring metric with the trend in simulated turtle population size in terms of adult equivalents. Over long time frames, either monitoring scheme performed equally well (mean population growth rates λ over 50 yr were within 1% of the growth rate estimated from simulated adult equivalents). Over shorter time frames, total adult females estimated from simulated nest counts generally tracked closer to adult equivalents than did abundance estimated from simulated aerial surveys; and λ for the nest count metric generally had a lower median absolute relative error. Aerial surveys added value if population impacts affected young turtles (which can take 20-30 yr to become nesters) or if impacts changed the population structure (e.g. changed the stable age distribution). For effective monitoring over short time frames, both monitoring schemes might be warranted.
url https://www.int-res.com/abstracts/esr/v34/p323-337/
work_keys_str_mv AT wardenml monitoringtrendsinseaturtlepopulationswalkorfly
AT haashl monitoringtrendsinseaturtlepopulationswalkorfly
AT richardspm monitoringtrendsinseaturtlepopulationswalkorfly
AT roseka monitoringtrendsinseaturtlepopulationswalkorfly
AT hatchjm monitoringtrendsinseaturtlepopulationswalkorfly
_version_ 1724823868161392640