Proceedings of the Vertebrate Pest Conference

Knowledge of wildlife population abundance and activity patterns is integral to sound management decisions. Traditional methods of determining population abundance include mark-recapture, catch/unit effort, aerial and ground counts, and harvest-based or removal efforts. Capture methods are labor intensive and expensive. Census methods are potentially expensive and are often impractical for many wildlife species. Harvest-derived population estimates are not useful where harvest is limited. Tracking or scent stations have been used to index wildlife activity and abundance, but the use of traditional scented-tracking stations may lead to biased population activity or abundance estimates. We built on previous evaluations of passive and scented tracking stations to determine their potential utility for providing raccoon and other carnivore population information to support decisions for wildlife rabies control in coastal pine-oak communities. Methods were evaluated through several small-scale studies conducted in southeastern Massachusetts. Passive tracking stations appear more sensitive to raccoon activity than scented tracking stations (1.38% of scented stations visited vs. 3.38% of passive stations) under apparently low raccoon population densities. Despite concerns over the utility of track-based indices, we recommend the use of passive tracking stations to index raccoon activity over scented tracking stations.