DOCSLIB.ORG

Camera-Trapping Page 1 Camera-Trapping Page 2

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Camera-Trapping Page 1 Camera-Trapping Page 2 CAMERA-TRAPPING PAGE 1 CAMERA-TRAPPING PAGE 2 Oliver R. Wearn & Paul Glover-Kapfer. 2017. WWF Conservation Technology Series 1(1). WWF-UK, Woking, United Kingdom. The authors are indebted to Carolina Soto Navarro for creating figures in this report, and to all of the people (credited in the figure captions) who kindly agreed to share their images with us. We also thank Jorge Ahumada, Mark Bowler, Paul Meek, Marcus Rowcliffe and Andy Whitworth for reviewing sections of the report. Funding for this report was provided by WWF-UK. WWF is one of the world’s largest and most experienced independent conservation organizations, with over 5 million supporters and a global network active in more than 100 countries. WWF’s mission is to stop the degradation of the planets natural environment and to build a future in which humans live in harmony with nature by conserving the worlds biological diversity, ensuring that the use of renewable natural resources is sustainable, and promoting the reduction of pollution and wasteful consumption. Cover Image: Thermal image of Panthera tigris © Judith Stryker CAMERA-TRAPPING PAGE 3 CAMERA-TRAPPING FAQ What is a camera trap and how is it different to a time-lapse camera? The modern digital camera trap is simply a digital compact camera sensor wired up to a passive infrared sensor which is able to “see” the infrared radiation given out by warm-blooded animals. However, any camera which is triggered by an animal to take pictures can be classed as a camera trap. This could include cameras triggered using any of a whole range of different methods, such as trip-wires, pull-wires, pressure plates, lasers or microwave sensors. A camera which is triggered remotely by a human is not a camera trap, and neither technically is a camera which is programmed to take pictures at set intervals, i.e. a time-lapse camera. The term “remote camera” is sometimes used to include this broader class of cameras, which are triggered in the absence of a human operator (but not necessarily by an animal). Other names for camera traps (mostly used in the hunting market) include game cameras, scouting cameras, or trail cameras. How expensive are camera traps? Off-the-shelf camera traps range in price from ~$50 to more than $1000 and, as ever in electronics, you get what you pay for. Typical mid-range camera traps suitable for robust scientific monitoring cost $300-500, with more expensive units typically having better detection circuitry, increased reliability, and more customisable settings. High-end camera traps can cost $500-1000, and may have video modes with a fast trigger speed (i.e. a short delay between sensing an animal and starting the recording) or be able to send images over mobile phone or wireless networks. Custom DSLR camera traps, which are necessary to take the highest quality images possible, can easily cost a few thousand dollars if bought new, and are a significant time investment to build and test. What animal groups can camera traps be used for? Almost all commercial camera traps sense animals using a passive infrared sensor. This sensor looks for sudden changes in the surface temperature of the environment in front of it, which could indicate the presence of an animal. These camera traps are best suited to anything that has a heat signature (i.e. body size and surface temperature) similar to a deer. This is because technological developments in the commercial camera trap market are still largely driven by the North American hunting market. Luckily, lots of animals have a heat signature sufficiently similar to a deer that the modern camera trap is useful for sampling a wide range of medium- to large-sized mammals and birds. The lower body size limit for camera traps used to be around 1 kg, but most mid- and high-end passive infrared sensors can now detect animals as small as 100 g, provided they are within 2 m. Beyond mammals and birds, passive infrared sensors have also been used to successfully detect reptiles (including small skinks, snakes, varanid lizards, and crocodiles). However, special approaches will usually be necessary in this case, and detections are unlikely to be as reliable as for mammals and birds. Other sensor types, such as active infrared sensors and pressure plates are alternative options when passive infrared sensors fail, albeit at greater cost. In addition, new software-based methods, such as pixel change detection, could expand camera-trapping into the aquatic realm in the near future, to monitor fish and marine mammals. CAMERA-TRAPPING PAGE 4 Can camera traps be used for monitoring animal abundance – will I be able to tell individual animals apart? Camera traps can be used to monitor a host of different ecosystem variables, such as the abundance, diversity and distribution of animals. Abundance monitoring is particularly effective with camera traps and has also been shown to be cost-efficient relative to rival methods (such as line-transects or live-trapping) for longer-term projects. It is often now the top choice of wildlife biologists, even for monitoring the rarest mammal and bird species in a community. A number of approaches can be used to monitor abundance. Most simply, the trapping rate (number of photos per unit of sampling effort) can be used an index of relative abundance, to compare trends across space or time, albeit with some important caveats. More robust methods include mark-recapture modelling (for species which can be individually-identified in images), and random encounter modelling (for species which cannot be individually-identified). In order to be able to indentify individual animals in images, they need to have unique markings, such as the stripes of a tiger or a zebra. You also need to use a camera trap which can take clear photos of the animal markings (in most cases, you will need a camera trap with a white flash, not an infrared flash). The random encounter model was originally formulated specifically with camera- trapping in mind, and requires some additional knowledge of the system, including the movement speed of the focal species and the detection zone characteristics of the camera. This requires additional fieldwork to make these measurements in the field. However, new methods are currently being trialled in order to be able to extract these from the camera trap images themselves. How many camera traps should I buy? Most often, the answer will be “as many as you can possibly get your hands on!”. The number of camera traps you have will determine the amount of data you can collect, and therefore which statistical methods it will be possible to apply. In practice, a better question to ask is “what is the minimum number of camera traps I need to achieve my objects?” This can be estimated approximately using information on your ideal survey design, how long it will take to set up camera traps (which will depend on how accessible your study sites are), and how quickly you need to complete the survey (e.g. to meet certain model assumptions, or due to the availability of resources). If you can afford (or can borrow) your estimated minimum number of camera traps, then your study is more likely to be a wise investment of scarce conservation resources. If you cannot meet the minimum required number of camera traps, then you should stop and seriously consider if you need to re-evaluate your study’s objectives. Even though there may be momentum building in your project, you should strongly avoid the temptation to just proceed regardless. CAMERA-TRAPPING PAGE 5 What camera trap model should I buy? Commercial camera traps are all broadly similar in basic form – being a compact digital camera, triggered by a passive infrared sensor – but they do nonetheless vary in a large number of important ways. Principle among these, are the characteristics of the detection circuitry (how sensitive the passive infrared sensor is, and how quickly the camera can take a picture after sensing an animal), whether they have an infrared or white flash, and whether they are able to send data remotely or not. The camera trap model most suitable for you will depend on what you intend to use it for. For example, if you intend to do random encounter modelling, you will need a camera with a fast trigger speed and, ideally, an infrared flash. If you intend to carry out a mark-recapture survey you will in- stead most likely need a camera with a Xenon white flash. Ultimately, given the vast num- ber of models on the market today, and the rapid pace at which they are updated by manufacturers, it is difficult to make a single recommendation for which camera trap model to buy. A sound knowledge of how camera traps work, and the key ways in which camera traps differ, will guide your purchasing decisions. Can camera traps record video? Not all commercial camera traps can record video, but an increasingly large number do. In most of the camera traps that record video, you simply choose which mode you want to use. Some models also offer a hybrid mode, which takes a single picture and then starts a video straight after. Note that video modes are slower than image modes, and you may therefore miss some animal detections altogether. They should therefore be used with caution in robust scientific monitoring. Video files also take up much more hard disk space than images, and are more difficult and laborious to process. Most camera trap software programs do not currently support video. A compromise between image and video is to use a camera trap capable of shooting in a “near-video” mode, in which rapid sequences of images (< 1 second apart) are taken.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Photographic Evidence of Desert Cat Felis Silvestris Ornata and Caracal
    [VOLUME 5 I ISSUE 4 I OCT. – DEC. 2018] e ISSN 2348 –1269, Print ISSN 2349-5138 http://ijrar.com/ Cosmos Impact Factor 4.236 Photographic evidence of Desert cat Felis silvestris ornata and Caracal Felis caracal using camera traps in human dominated forests of Ranthambhore Tiger Reserve, Rajasthan, India Raju Lal Gurjar* & Anil Kumar Chhangani Department of Environmental Science, Maharaja Ganga Singh University, Bikaner- 334001 (Rajasthan) *Email: [email protected] Received: July 04, 2018 Accepted: August 22, 2018 ABSTRACT We recorded movement of Desert cat Felis silvestris ornata and Caracal Felis caracal using camera traps in human dominated corridors from Ranthambhore National Park to Kailadevi Wildlife Sanctuary, Western India. We obtained 9 caracal captures and one Desert cat capture in 360 camera trap nights. Our findings revels that presence of both cat species outside park in corridors was associated with functionality of corridor as well as availability of prey. Further the forest patches, ravines and undulating terrain supports dispersal of small mammals too. Desert cat and Caracals were more active late at night and during crepuscular hours. There was a difference in their activity between dusk and dawn. Since this is its kind of observation beyond parks regime we genuinely argue for conservation of corridors and its protection leads us to conserve both large as well as small cats in the region. Keywords: Desert Cat, Caracal, Camera Trap, Ranthambhore National Park, Kailadevi Wildlife Sanctuary INTRODUCTION India has 11 species of small cats besides the charismatic big cats like tiger Panthera tigris, leopard Panthera pardus, Snow leopard Panthera uncia and Asiatic lion Panthera leo persica.
    [Show full text]
  • On the Complexities of Using New Visual Technologies to Communicate About Wildlife Communication
    Verma A, Van der Wal R, Fischer A. Microscope and spectacle: On the complexities of using new visual technologies to communicate about wildlife communication. Ambio 2015, 44(Suppl. 4), 648-660. Copyright: © The Author(s) 2015 Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. DOI link to article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s13280-015-0715-z Date deposited: 05/12/2016 This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License Newcastle University ePrints - eprint.ncl.ac.uk Ambio 2015, 44(Suppl. 4):S648–S660 DOI 10.1007/s13280-015-0715-z Microscope and spectacle: On the complexities of using new visual technologies to communicate about wildlife conservation Audrey Verma, Rene´ van der Wal, Anke Fischer Abstract Wildlife conservation-related organisations well-versed in crafting public outreach and awareness- increasingly employ new visual technologies in their raising activities. These range from unidirectional educa- science communication and public engagement efforts. tional campaigns and advertising and branding projects, to Here, we examine the use of such technologies for wildlife citizen science research with varying degrees of public conservation campaigns. We obtained empirical data from participation, the implementation of interactive media four UK-based organisations through semi-structured strategies, and the expansion of modes of interpretation to interviews and participant observation.
    [Show full text]
  • First Record of Hose's Civet Diplogale Hosei from Indonesia
    First record of Hose’s Civet Diplogale hosei from Indonesia, and records of other carnivores in the Schwaner Mountains, Central Kalimantan, Indonesia Hiromitsu SAMEJIMA1 and Gono SEMIADI2 Abstract One of the least-recorded carnivores in Borneo, Hose’s Civet Diplogale hosei , was filmed twice in a logging concession, the Katingan–Seruyan Block of Sari Bumi Kusuma Corporation, in the Schwaner Mountains, upper Seruyan River catchment, Central Kalimantan. This, the first record of this species in Indonesia, is about 500 km southwest of its previously known distribution (northern Borneo: Sarawak, Sabah and Brunei). Filmed at 325The m a.s.l., IUCN these Red List records of Threatened are below Species the previously known altitudinal range (450–1,800Prionailurus m). This preliminary planiceps survey forPardofelis medium badia and large and Otter mammals, Civet Cynogalerunning 100bennettii camera-traps in 10 plots for one (Bandedyear, identified Civet Hemigalus in this concession derbyanus 17 carnivores, Arctictis including, binturong on Neofelis diardi, three Endangered Pardofe species- lis(Flat-headed marmorata Cat and Sun Bear Helarctos malayanus, Bay Cat . ) and six Vulnerable species , Binturong , Sunda Clouded Leopard , Marbled Cat Keywords Cynogale bennettii, as well, Pardofelis as Hose’s badia Civet), Prionailurus planiceps Catatan: PertamaBorneo, camera-trapping, mengenai Musang Gunung Diplogale hosei di Indonesia, serta, sustainable karnivora forest management lainnya di daerah Pegunungan Schwaner, Kalimantan Tengah Abstrak Diplogale hosei Salah satu jenis karnivora yang jarang dijumpai di Borneo, Musang Gunung, , telah terekam dua kali di daerah- konsesi hutan Blok Katingan–Seruyan- PT. Sari Bumi Kusuma, Pegunungan Schwaner, di sekitar hulu Sungai Seruya, Kalimantan Tengah. Ini merupakan catatan pertama spesies tersebut terdapat di Indonesia, sekitar 500 km dari batas sebaran yang diketa hui saat ini (Sarawak, Sabah, Brunei).
    [Show full text]
  • 1 the Origin and Evolution of the Domestic Cat
    1 The Origin and Evolution of the Domestic Cat There are approximately 40 different species of the cat family, classification Felidae (Table 1.1), all of which are descended from a leopard-like predator Pseudaelurus that existed in South-east Asia around 11 million years ago (O’Brien and Johnson, 2007). Other than the domestic cat, the most well known of the Felidae are the big cats such as lions, tigers and panthers, sub-classification Panthera. But the cat family also includes a large number of small cats, including a group commonly known as the wildcats, sub-classification Felis silvestris (Table 1.2). Physical similarity suggests that the domestic cat (Felis silvestris catus) originally derived from one or more than one of these small wildcats. DNA examination shows that it is most closely related to the African wildcat (Felis silvestris lybica), which has almost identical DNA, indicating that the African wildcat is the domestic cat’s primary ancestor (Lipinski et al., 2008). The African Wildcat The African wildcat is still in existence today and is a solitary and highly territorial animal indigenous to areas of North Africa and the Near East, the region where domestication of the cat is believed to have first taken place (Driscoll et al., 2007; Faure and Kitchener, 2009). It is primarily a nocturnal hunter that preys mainly on rodents but it will also eat insects, reptiles and other mammals including the young of small antelopes. Also known as the Arabian or North African wildcat, it is similar in appearance to a domestic tabby, with a striped grey/sandy-coloured coat, but is slightly larger and with longer legs (Fig.
    [Show full text]
  • Bay Cat 1 Bay Cat
    Bay Cat 1 Bay Cat Bay Cat Conservation status [1] Endangered (IUCN 3.1) Scientific classification Kingdom: Animalia Phylum: Chordata Class: Mammalia Order: Carnivora Family: Felidae Genus: Pardofelis Species: P. badia Binomial name Pardofelis badia[1] (Gray, 1874) Bay Cat 2 [2] Blue dots indicate bay cat records from 2003 to 2005. The Bay Cat (Pardofelis badia syn. Catopuma badia), also known as Bornean Cat, Bornean Bay Cat, Bornean Marbled Cat, is a wild cat endemic to the island of Borneo that appears relatively rare compared to sympatric felids, based on the paucity of historical as well as recent records. In 2002, the IUCN classified the forest-dependent species as endangered because of a projected population decline by more than 20% by 2020 due to habitat loss. As of 2007, the effective population size was suspected to be below 2,500 mature individuals.[1] Bay cats have historically been recorded as rare and today seem to occur at relatively low density, even in pristine habitat.[3] Characteristics The bay cat is much larger than the Asian golden cat. Its fur is of a bright chestnut-colour, rather paler beneath, the limbs and the tail being rather paler and redder. The tail is elongate, tapering at the end, with a white central streak occupying the hinder half of the lower side, gradually becoming wider and of a purer white towards the tip, which has a small black spot at its upper end. The ears are rounded, covered with a short blackish-brown fur at the outer side, paler brown within and with a narrow brown margin.[4] [4] Illustration of a bay cat In the years between 1874 to 2004, only 12 specimens were measured.
    [Show full text]
  • Savannah Cat’ ‘Savannah the Including Serval Hybrids Felis Catus (Domestic Cat), (Serval) and (Serval) Hybrids Of
    Invasive animal risk assessment Biosecurity Queensland Agriculture Fisheries and Department of Serval hybrids Hybrids of Leptailurus serval (serval) and Felis catus (domestic cat), including the ‘savannah cat’ Anna Markula, Martin Hannan-Jones and Steve Csurhes First published 2009 Updated 2016 © State of Queensland, 2016. The Queensland Government supports and encourages the dissemination and exchange of its information. The copyright in this publication is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Australia (CC BY) licence. You must keep intact the copyright notice and attribute the State of Queensland as the source of the publication. Note: Some content in this publication may have different licence terms as indicated. For more information on this licence visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/ by/3.0/au/deed.en" http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/au/deed.en Front cover: Close-up of a 4-month old F1 Savannah cat. Note the occelli on the back of the relaxed ears, and the tear-stain markings which run down the side of the nose. Photo: Jason Douglas. Image from Wikimedia Commons under a Public Domain Licence. Invasive animal risk assessment: Savannah cat Felis catus (hybrid of Leptailurus serval) 2 Contents Introduction 4 Identity of taxa under review 5 Identification of hybrids 8 Description 10 Biology 11 Life history 11 Savannah cat breed history 11 Behaviour 12 Diet 12 Predators and diseases 12 Legal status of serval hybrids including savannah cats (overseas) 13 Legal status of serval hybrids including savannah cats
    [Show full text]
  • 2007 No. 1437 ANIMALS the Dangerous
    STATUTORY INSTRUMENTS 2007 No. 1437 ANIMALS The Dangerous Wild Animals Act 1976 (Modification) Order 2007 Made - - - - 8th May 2007 Laid before Parliament 14th May 2007 Coming into force - - 1st October 2007 The Secretary of State in exercise of the powers conferred upon him by section 8(1) of the Dangerous Wild Animals Act 1976(a), being satisfied that the scope of that Act should be both extended so as to include animals of a kind not for the time being specified in the Schedule to that Act and diminished so as to exclude animals of a kind for the time being specified in that Schedule, makes the following Order: Citation and commencement 1. This Order may be cited as the Dangerous Wild Animals Act 1976 (Modification) Order 2007 and shall come into force on 1st October 2007. Modification 2. For the Schedule to the Dangerous Wild Animals Act 1976 substitute the Schedule set out in the Schedule to this Order. Revocation 3. The Dangerous Wild Animals Act 1976 (Modification) Order 1984(b) is revoked. Barry Gardiner Parliamentary Under Secretary of State 8th May 2007 Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (a) 1976 c.38. (b) S.I. 1984/1111. SCHEDULE Article 2 “SCHEDULE Section 7 KINDS OF DANGEROUS WILD ANIMALS NOTE: See section 7(5) of this Act for the effect of the second column of this Schedule Scientific name of kind Common name or names MAMMALS Marsupials Family Dasyuridae: The Tasmanian devil. The species Sarcophilus laniarius. Family Macropodidae: The western and eastern grey kangaroos, the The species Macropus fuliginosus, Macropus wallaroo and the red kangaroo.
    [Show full text]
  • Camera Installation Instructions
    Camera Installation Instructions Before going into the field: The following field equipment and supplies need to be ready and packed before the team leaves for a field assignment: 1) Trail camera unit. Unit should include the actual trail camera with 8 Eneloop batteries and SD card already in place, the trail camera armored case with label attached, and the master python cable lock with matching key on keychain. REMEMBER!!! When packing the camera traps to take in the field do not store them with food or any other substances that might attach odors to the camera trap. Food or other smells might attract animals to the camera trap in the field, thus biasing the estimates of detection probability. 2) GPS capable device. This can either be a portable or handheld GPS unit or a GPS- capable smartphone with either the TopoMaps+ (iPhone) or Backcountry Navigator (Android) application downloaded. 3) Fieldwork folder. The fieldwork folder should include this camera installation sheet; the datasheet required for each check; the station placard to be displayed after a deployment, check, or takedown; a dry erase marker, and a pen. 4) Hiking equipment. Please make sure to have AT LEAST the following whenever going out into the field: a. Daypack and hiking partner (all volunteers MUST be accompanied by AT LEAST one other person b. Map, GPS, or compass c. Extra clothing, food, and water d. First-aid kit e. Headlamp or flashlight f. Matches and fire-starting kit or lighter g. Knife or multi-use camping tool h. Sunglasses and sunscreen i. Water treatment device j.
    [Show full text]
  • Small Carnivores of Karnataka: Distribution and Sight Records1
    Journal of the Bombay Natural History Society, 104 (2), May-Aug 2007 155-162 SMALL CARNIVORES OF KARNATAKA SMALL CARNIVORES OF KARNATAKA: DISTRIBUTION AND SIGHT RECORDS1 H.N. KUMARA2,3 AND MEWA SINGH2,4 1Accepted November 2006 2 Biopsychology Laboratory, University of Mysore, Mysore 570 006, Karnataka, India. 3Email: [email protected] 4Email: [email protected] During a study from November 2001 to July 2004 on ecology and status of wild mammals in Karnataka, we sighted 143 animals belonging to 11 species of small carnivores of about 17 species that are expected to occur in the state of Karnataka. The sighted species included Leopard Cat, Rustyspotted Cat, Jungle Cat, Small Indian Civet, Asian Palm Civet, Brown Palm Civet, Common Mongoose, Ruddy Mongoose, Stripe-necked Mongoose and unidentified species of Otters. Malabar Civet, Fishing Cat, Brown Mongoose, Nilgiri Marten, and Ratel were not sighted during this study. The Western Ghats alone account for thirteen species of small carnivores of which six are endemic. The sighting of Rustyspotted Cat is the first report from Karnataka. Habitat loss and hunting are the major threats for the small carnivore survival in nature. The Small Indian Civet is exploited for commercial purpose. Hunting technique varies from guns to specially devised traps, and hunting of all the small carnivore species is common in the State. Key words: Felidae, Viverridae, Herpestidae, Mustelidae, Karnataka, threats INTRODUCTION (Mukherjee 1989; Mudappa 2001; Rajamani et al. 2003; Mukherjee et al. 2004). Other than these studies, most of the Mammals of the families Felidae, Viverridae, information on these animals comes from anecdotes or sight Herpestidae, Mustelidae and Procyonidae are generally records, which no doubt, have significantly contributed in called small carnivores.
    [Show full text]
  • Husbandry Guidelines for African Lion Panthera Leo Class
    Husbandry Guidelines For (Johns 2006) African Lion Panthera leo Class: Mammalia Felidae Compiler: Annemarie Hillermann Date of Preparation: December 2009 Western Sydney Institute of TAFE, Richmond Course Name: Certificate III Captive Animals Course Number: RUV 30204 Lecturer: Graeme Phipps, Jacki Salkeld, Brad Walker DISCLAIMER The information within this document has been compiled by Annemarie Hillermann from general knowledge and referenced sources. This document is strictly for informational purposes only. The information within this document may be amended or changed at any time by the author. The information has been reviewed by professionals within the industry, however, the author will not be held accountable for any misconstrued information within the document. 2 OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH AND SAFETY RISKS Wildlife facilities must adhere to and abide by the policies and procedures of Occupational Health and Safety legislation. A safe and healthy environment must be provided for the animals, visitors and employees at all times within the workplace. All employees must ensure to maintain and be committed to these regulations of OHS within their workplace. All lions are a DANGEROUS/ HIGH RISK and have the potential of fatally injuring a person. Precautions must be followed when working with lions. Consider reducing any potential risks or hazards, including; Exhibit design considerations – e.g. Ergonomics, Chemical, Physical and Mechanical, Behavioural, Psychological, Communications, Radiation, and Biological requirements. EAPA Standards must be followed for exhibit design. Barrier considerations – e.g. Mesh used for roofing area, moats, brick or masonry, Solid/strong metal caging, gates with locking systems, air-locks, double barriers, electric fencing, feeding dispensers/drop slots and ensuring a den area is incorporated.
    [Show full text]
  • Flat Headed Cat Andean Mountain Cat Discover the World's 33 Small
    Meet the Small Cats Discover the world’s 33 small cat species, found on 5 of the globe’s 7 continents. AMERICAS Weight Diet AFRICA Weight Diet 4kg; 8 lbs Andean Mountain Cat African Golden Cat 6-16 kg; 13-35 lbs Leopardus jacobita (single male) Caracal aurata Bobcat 4-18 kg; 9-39 lbs African Wildcat 2-7 kg; 4-15 lbs Lynx rufus Felis lybica Canadian Lynx 5-17 kg; 11-37 lbs Black Footed Cat 1-2 kg; 2-4 lbs Lynx canadensis Felis nigripes Georoys' Cat 3-7 kg; 7-15 lbs Caracal 7-26 kg; 16-57 lbs Leopardus georoyi Caracal caracal Güiña 2-3 kg; 4-6 lbs Sand Cat 2-3 kg; 4-6 lbs Leopardus guigna Felis margarita Jaguarundi 4-7 kg; 9-15 lbs Serval 6-18 kg; 13-39 lbs Herpailurus yagouaroundi Leptailurus serval Margay 3-4 kg; 7-9 lbs Leopardus wiedii EUROPE Weight Diet Ocelot 7-18 kg; 16-39 lbs Leopardus pardalis Eurasian Lynx 13-29 kg; 29-64 lbs Lynx lynx Oncilla 2-3 kg; 4-6 lbs Leopardus tigrinus European Wildcat 2-7 kg; 4-15 lbs Felis silvestris Pampas Cat 2-3 kg; 4-6 lbs Leopardus colocola Iberian Lynx 9-15 kg; 20-33 lbs Lynx pardinus Southern Tigrina 1-3 kg; 2-6 lbs Leopardus guttulus ASIA Weight Diet Weight Diet Asian Golden Cat 9-15 kg; 20-33 lbs Leopard Cat 1-7 kg; 2-15 lbs Catopuma temminckii Prionailurus bengalensis 2 kg; 4 lbs Bornean Bay Cat Marbled Cat 3-5 kg; 7-11 lbs Pardofelis badia (emaciated female) Pardofelis marmorata Chinese Mountain Cat 7-9 kg; 16-19 lbs Pallas's Cat 3-5 kg; 7-11 lbs Felis bieti Otocolobus manul Fishing Cat 6-16 kg; 14-35 lbs Rusty-Spotted Cat 1-2 kg; 2-4 lbs Prionailurus viverrinus Prionailurus rubiginosus Flat
    [Show full text]
  • Caracal Caracal – Caracal
    Caracal caracal – Caracal Common names: Caracal, African Caracal, Asian Caracal, Desert Lynx (English), Rooikat, Lynx (Afrikaans), Indabutshe (Ndebele), Thwane (Setswana), Thooane, Thahalere (Sotho), Nandani (Tsonga), Thwani (Venda), Ingqawa, Ngada (Xhosa), Indabushe (Zulu) Taxonomic status: Species Taxonomic notes: The Caracal has been classified variously with Lynx and Felis in the past, but molecular evidence supports a monophyletic genus. It is closely allied with the African Golden Cat (Caracal aurata) and the Serval (Leptailurus serval), having diverged around 8.5 mya (Janczewski et al. 1995; Johnson & O’Brien 1997; Johnson et al. 2006). Seven subspecies have been recognised in Africa (Smithers 1975), of which two occur in southern Africa: C. c. damarensis from Namibia, the Northern Cape, southern Botswana and southern and central Angola; and the nominate C. c. caracal from the remainder of the species’ range in southern Africa (Meester et al. 1986). According to Stuart and Stuart (2013), however, these subspecies should best be considered as geographical variants. Assessment Rationale Caracals are widespread within the assessment region. They are considered highly adaptable and, within their distribution area, are found in virtually all habitats except the driest part of the Namib. They also tolerate high levels Marine Drouilly of human activity, and persist in most small stock areas in southern Africa, despite continuously high levels of Regional Red List status (2016) Least Concern persecution over many decades. In some regions it is National Red List status (2004) Least Concern even expected that Caracal numbers might have increased. Thus, the Least Concern listing remains. The Reasons for change No change use of blanket control measures over vast areas and the uncontrolled predation management efforts over virtually Global Red List status (2016) Least Concern the total assessment region are, however, of concern.
    [Show full text]