Table 4. Comparison of different monitoring methods.
Purpose | Monitoring by tracks | Camera trap monitoring | Infrared trail monitoring | |
Species identification | Reliability | Reliable, but depends on the track pad material and condition | Highly reliable, but can miss fast moving animals (e.g. roe deer) | |
Not possible | ||||
Improvements | Use higher proportion of fine-grained material | Combine with track pads for better species coverage | ||
Wildlife crossings estimation | Estimation bias | Underestimated | Underestimated | Overestimated |
Improvements | Frequent field visits (expensive!) or combination with other methods | Combination with other methods | Usage of filtering algorithm tuned by camera trap data to improve wildlife crossing estimation |