Buffalo Lake Metis Settlement
ABMI CBME
2025-04-29
1 Project Introduction
Buffalo Lake Metis Settlement (BLMS) began their camera program in 2024 and deployed 41 cameras between April and November of 2024.
The images from this project can be accessed on WildTrax here: Buffalo Lake Metis Settlement Terrestrial Cumulative Effects ABMI Wildlife Biodiversity Camera Program.
Figure 1.1: MNA Region 1 Field Crew with Dave Evans from ABMI CBME deploying cameras.
2 Camera Locations
The following interactive map can be used to explore the locations of the cameras deployed by MNA Region 1. Satellite imagery can switched on and off using the button in the top right of the top.
3 Camera Operating Times
Here we display when the cameras were operating so we can check for any discrepancies and failures in the camera deployment.
4 Number of Images Collected
The figure below displays the total number of images collected on the most common 6 species present in the BLMS camera project.
Figure 4.1: Total Number of Images Captured By BLMS Camera Project
You can download the figure by clicking this link.
For a complete list of all the species, you can go to the project on WildTrax and click on the ‘Species Verification’ tab of the project.
5 Independent Detections Over Time
With camera data, one useful metric to track over time is the number of “independent” detections captured for each species. In this case, an independent detection is defined as an image or series of images captured for a given species within a specific time interval. In the figure below we present the number of independent detections for each of the 8 main species using a 30 minute time interval; that is, images captured within 30 minutes of each other count toward a single detection and images with a gap of greater than 30 minutes between them count as multiple independent detections. Images that are captured of the same species over less than 30 minutes are assumed to be of the same individual, or group of individuals.
Figure 5.1: Independent Species Detections Captured By BLMS Camera Project
You can download the figure by clicking this link.
5.1 Species-specific figures
Here is displayed each of the species independent detections individually, which can be toggled through using the tabs below.
White-tailed Deer
Figure 5.2: Independent Detections for White-tailed Deer
Download figure with this link.
6 Temporal Activity Patterns
Given that camera traps operate 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, and can record animal motion down to second-level precision, they represent a powerful tool to explore and contrast the activity patterns of the species they detect. Such analyses can give insight into competition, predation, and coexistence.
In this section we present the temporal (diel) activity patterns for each of the 8 species from MNA Region 1 cameras.
White-tailed Deer
Figure 6.1: Activity Pattern of White-tailed Deer
White-tailed deer display a diurnal pattern in this data, with activity peaks at both dawn and dusk.
Black Bear
Figure 6.2: Activity Pattern of Black Bear
Black Bears are more active in the evenings and overnight.
Canada Lynx
Figure 6.3: Activity Pattern of Canada Lynx
Coyote
Figure 6.4: Activity Pattern of Coyote
Coyotes are primarily active during the nighttime.
Moose
Figure 6.5: Activity Pattern of Moose
Moose activity peaks during the dawn periods.
Snowshoe Hare
Figure 6.6: Activity Pattern of Snowshoe Hare
Snowshoe Hare are most active at night.
7 Species Co-Occurences
Camera trap data are being increasingly used to model multiple species communities, and we can use this data to explore the co-occurrence patterns of the species in the community.
The plot below displays pairwise correlations between the species on the left and the species on the top row. Blue colours indicate positive correlation, meaning that the two species are positively associated with one another. Red colours indicate the opposite, that where you have high counts of one species you likely have low counts of the other (and vice versa).
Figure 7.1: Species Co-Occurrences at BLMS Camera Deployments
8 Comparisons Between Grids
In this section we present the results from BLMS camera deployments evaluating the differences between the two grids. To do this, we estimated the species-specific density at each camera using the Time in Front of Camera (TIFC) approach (Becker et al., 2022). This method has previously been used to estimate densities of unmarked populations of both white-tailed deer and moose in the boreal region of Alberta. Analagous to quadrat sampling, the TIFC approach involves (for each camera) multiplying the number of animals observed by the total time they spend in front of the camera, which is then divided by the product of the area effectively sampled by the camera and the total time the camera was operating. This calculation yields an estimate of animals per unit area (i.e., ‘density’).
White-tailed Deer
Figure 8.1: White-tailed Deer Density By Grid
Black Bear
Figure 8.2: Black Bear Density By Grid
Coyote
Figure 8.3: Coyote Density By Grid
Moose
Figure 8.4: Moose Density By Grid