Remote camera

Abstract: Camera traps are increasingly used to monitor wildlife populations and management activities. Failing to detect target occurrence and/or behaviour inhibits the robustness of wildlife surveys. Based on user‐testing, it is reasonable to expect some equipment to malfunction but other sources of failure, such as those caused by theft and vandalism, are largely unquantified. Between May 2016 and October 2017, we undertook an international survey of professional practitioners who use camera traps for wildlife research and management projects to quantify theft and vandalism, and to document the subsequent effects on project outcomes. We also sought to record the methods used by practitioners to avoid theft and vandalism and whether or not practitioners believed those actions were effective. Most (59%) of the 407 respondents were wildlife researchers and university academics. The survey results revealed that camera trap theft and vandalism is a global issue that not only adds to costs via equipment loss (approx. USD $1.48 million from n = 309 respondents between 2010 and 2015) and theft prevention (c. USD $800 000 spent by respondents between 2010 and 2015) but also influences survey design. Vandalism and theft are clearly a global problem, with responses suggesting that they occur across a diverse array of geographic locations, at varying proximity to human settlements, in multiple habitat types and across device placements. Methods to deter human interference included using camouflaging (73%), security devices such as chains (63%) and boxes (43%), use of decoy camera traps, shortening deployment periods, setting the camera relatively high or low to the ground, or moving away from human traffic. Despite this, the responses suggest that attempts to mitigate losses are often not effective. In review of our findings, we make recommendations for the future of camera trapping that requires implementation and testing.

Abstract: Remotely triggered cameras have been used in many ecological studies, but most are relatively inexpensive one-time-only systems or expensive infrared systems. We describe the setup and wiring technique for a moderately priced, multiple-photo camera system. Two study areas, California and Vermont, were used to assess usefulness of the camera system. Although some target carnivore species were photographed regularly, visitation rates of other carnivores were low, due either to low population densities or camera shyness. Cameras generally worked well under all conditions, but the pressure-plate triggering devices sometimes became inoperable during heavy rains. Other camera activation systems may reveal additional uses for this remote camera system.

Abstract: A wireless video camera that permits bookmarking of objects in the surrounding environment of the camera. When a remote user selects to see (via streaming video) a previously bookmarked object, the camera determines the appropriate camera viewing parameter to replicate the bookmarked view of the object. To account for an intervening change in position of the camera, the camera may compute any change in position of the camera, and adjust the camera viewing parameters for the bookmarked view to compensate for the camera's updated position so that the original bookmarked view of the object can be replicated. Also, in a streaming video mode where the camera is streaming video to the remote user, the remote user can use a still image from the camera to control the remote camera.