Comparing camera traps and visual encounter surveys for monitoring small animals

Amphibian and reptile species face numerous threats including disease, habitat loss and degradation, invasive species, and global climate change. However, effective management and conservation of herpetofauna largely depends upon resource-intensive survey methodologies. Recent research has shown promise in the use of camera trapping techniques, but these methods must be tested alongside traditional methods to fully understand their advantages and disadvantages. To meet this research need, we tested two herpetofauna survey methods: a modified version of the Adapted-Hunt Drift Fence Technique, which combines a drift fence with camera traps; and a traditional method of visual encounter surveys (VES) with cover boards. Between June and August 2020, we conducted two VES and installed one drift fence with camera traps at ten sites in Monterey County, CA, USA. The drift fence/camera setup outperformed the VES in terms of number of observations and herpetofauna species detected. Drift fences with cameras produced a mean of 248 images of three to six species per site, while VES and cover objects produced a mean of 0.6 observations of zero to one species per site. Across all sites, we detected seven reptile and one amphibian species with the drift fence/camera setup, while VES resulted in identifications of two reptile and one amphibian species. In addition, drift fence/camera setups recorded a minimum of nine nonherpetofauna species including small mammals, birds, and invertebrates. Our research supports that drift fences combined with camera traps offer an effective alternative to VES for large-scale, multi-species herpetofauna survey efforts. Furthermore, we suggest specific improvements to enhance this method’s performance, cost-effectiveness, and utility in remote environments. These advances in survey methods hold great promise for aiding efforts to manage and conserve global herpetofauna diversity.