Show simple item record

Files in this item

Thumbnail

Item metadata

dc.contributor.authorRexstad, Eric
dc.contributor.authorBuckland, Stephen T.
dc.coverage.spatial5 p.en_US
dc.date.accessioned2009-11-13T15:07:47Z
dc.date.available2009-11-13T15:07:47Z
dc.date.issued2009
dc.identifier.citationCREEM technical report ; 2009-01en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/10023/784
dc.description.abstractDuring the month of March, four survey methods were applied to the SPA at Camarthen Bay. WWT staff carried out visual aerial surveys using distance sampling methodology (Camphuysen et al. 2004). Visual shore-based counts were also conducted. Distance measures were not consistently taken by these observers, nor was survey effort equal among the four surveys. Because they are intended to be complete counts without replication within a day, it is not possible to estimate precision of these counts, or assess bias, making comparison with other survey results difficult. Digital still data were collected and processed by APEM Ltd. Digital video imagery were captured and processed by HiDef. This report revision includes 29 March survey data from HiDef not available at the time of the release of our 17 July report.en_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherCREEM, University of St Andrewsen_US
dc.subject.lccQen_US
dc.subject.lccQAen_US
dc.subject.lccQHen_US
dc.subject.lccQLen_US
dc.titleComparison of aerial survey methods for estimating abundance of common scotersen
dc.typeReporten_US
dc.description.versionPostprinten_US
dc.publicationstatusNot publisheden_US
dc.statusNon peer revieweden_US


This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record