Title

Usefulness of funnel traps in catching small reptiles and mammals, with comments on the effectiveness of the alternatives

Document Type

Journal Article

Publisher

CSIRO Publishing

Faculty

Business and Law

School

Marketing, Tourism and Leisure

RAS ID

4766

Comments

This article was originally published as: Thompson, G. G., & Thompson, S. A. (2007). Usefulness of funnel traps in catching small reptiles and mammals, with comments on the effectiveness of the alternatives. Wildlife Research, 34(6), 491-497. Original article available here

Abstract

Funnel traps were used in conjunction with pit traps (PVC buckets and pipes), Elliott traps and cage traps at 10 sites in southern Western Australia to examine sampling bias of trap types. Funnel traps seldom catch small mammals but catch more of the medium-sized and large terrestrial, diurnal snakes and some of the widely foraging, medium-sized skinks, medium-sized dragon lizards and arboreal geckos that climb out of PVC pit traps. For pit traps, buckets catch more reptiles, particularly smaller ones, than pipes. However, pipes catch more mammals than buckets. Elliott traps catch the same suite of small mammals as pipes plus some of the large, trappable species, such as Rattus spp. Cage traps are useful for trapping Tiliqua spp. and medium-sized mammals such as possums and bandicoots that are unlikely to be caught in pit and funnel traps. Funnel traps, pit traps and cage traps should be used in surveys of small terrestrial vertebrates to determine species richness and relative abundance in Western Australia and probably elsewhere. However, as cage traps are mostly useful for catching Tiliqua spp. and medium-sized mammals, they need only be used in faunal surveys undertaken for environmental impact assessments specifically targeting these species.

DOI

10.1071/WR06081

 

Link to publisher version (DOI)

10.1071/WR06081