Comparing Leopard (Panthera pardus) Population Monitoring Techniques: Baited Vs Standard Camera Trapping

While camera traps are often deployed to monitor cryptic carnivore species, such as leopards (Panthera pardus), the design used during each deployment can influence detection efficiency and individual identification. It is therefore important to understand which factors should be considered when designing monitoring programmes. Here, we aimed to determine the effectiveness of baited camera trapping (BCT) as an alternative to standard camera trapping (SCT) for monitoring leopard populations. The objectives were to (1) compare capture rates between BCT and SCT, (2) determine the minimum sampling duration required for each method, (3) assess the reliability of age and sex classification, and (4) evaluate the costs associated with both methods. Forty camera traps were deployed across 20 BCT and 20 SCT stations over two years, with each method sampled for a minimum of 45 trap nights. To determine costs per method, total costs were calculated and compared on a per-site and per trap-night basis. Analyses were performed to compare capture rates, sampling duration, individual identification accuracy, and cost structure. BCT produced higher detection rates within a shorter sampling period and resulted in more reliable age and sex classification of individual leopards. By contrast, SCT recorded a higher number of newly detected individuals, indicating broader population coverage despite lower capture rates. Cost analysis showed that BCT was more expensive than SCT on a per site basis. However, when accounting for the minimum sampling duration required to achieve comparable detections, BCT proved more cost-efficient due to reduced time in the field. This study demonstrates that while BCT enhances detection rates and improves individual identification, SCT remains more suitable for long-term population monitoring, where broader detection over time is required. These findings contribute to a broader understanding of leopard monitoring and provide a useful comparison with other studies. However, variation in prey availability, habitat structure, and leopard movement patterns across systems may influence method performance. Additional data from other sites and habitat types are therefore needed to determine whether these patterns remain consistent across different environments.