Comparing established visitor monitoring approaches with triggered trail camera images and machine learning based computer vision

Abstract The management of protected areas and other recreational landscapes is subject to a variety of challenges. One aspect hereof, visitor monitoring, is crucial for many management and valuation tasks of ecosystem services. Its core data are visitor numbers which are costly to estimate in absence of entry fees for protected areas or recreational landscapes. Camera-based approaches have the potential to be both, accurate and deliver comprehensive data about visitor numbers, types and activities. So far, camera-based visitor monitoring is, however, costly due to time consuming manual image evaluation. To overcome this limitation, we deployed a convolutional neural network and compared its hourly counts against existing visitor counting methods such as manual in-situ counting, a pressure sensor, and manual camera image evaluations. Our study is the first one to implement, and explicitly assess the performance of a computer vision approach for visitor-monitoring. The results showed that the convolutional neural network derived comparable visitor numbers to the other visitor counting approaches regarding visitation patterns and numbers of visits. Further, our approach also allowed for counting dogs and recreational equipment such as backpacks and bicycles in automatic manner. We thus conclude that it is a fast and reliable method that could be used in protected areas as well as in a much wider array of visitor counting settings in other recreational landscapes. Management implications Managers of protected and recreational areas could benefit from our comparisons of convolutional neural network camera image evaluations with existing visitor counting approaches as: • Time-consuming manual image evaluation can be replaced by computer vision approaches based on convolutional neural networks (40 h to manually analyze more than 13,000 images by one expert vs. 10 h to do it automatically in the background). • In contrast to pressure sensors, this approach also allows to differentiate visitor types and activities (dog-walking, cycling, etc.) at comparably low-costs. • Future efforts should concentrate on training specific convolutional neural networks dedicated to visitor monitoring in recreational settings which could process imagery at real-time in the field using single-board computers. • Nevertheless, this approach is prone to the usual disadvantages of camera-based visitor monitoring (risks of theft, vandalism, malfunctioning; data security issues), which need to be considered when setting up the device.

[1]  Bernt Schiele,et al.  Towards Reaching Human Performance in Pedestrian Detection , 2018, IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence.

[2]  Ali Farhadi,et al.  YOLO9000: Better, Faster, Stronger , 2016, 2017 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR).

[3]  Arne Arnberger,et al.  Tagestourismus oder Wohnumfeldnutzung? , 2016 .

[4]  Andrew Balmford,et al.  Walk on the Wild Side: Estimating the Global Magnitude of Visits to Protected Areas , 2015, PLoS biology.

[5]  Graham W. Taylor,et al.  Deep Learning Object Detection Methods for Ecological Camera Trap Data , 2018, 2018 15th Conference on Computer and Robot Vision (CRV).

[6]  P. Eagles,et al.  Guidelines for Public Use Measurement and Reporting at Parks and Protected Areas , 1999 .

[7]  Greg Falzon,et al.  ClassifyMe: A Field-Scouting Software for the Identification of Wildlife in Camera Trap Images , 2019, Animals : an open access journal from MDPI.

[8]  Peter Newman,et al.  Estimating visitor use at attraction sites and trailheads in Yosemite National Park using automated visitor counters , 2010 .

[9]  Ali Farhadi,et al.  You Only Look Once: Unified, Real-Time Object Detection , 2015, 2016 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR).

[10]  Tina Highfill,et al.  Measuring the U.S. outdoor recreation economy, 2012–2016 , 2019, Journal of Outdoor Recreation and Tourism.

[11]  Hannes Taubenböck,et al.  Large-scale building extraction in very high-resolution aerial imagery using Mask R-CNN , 2019, 2019 Joint Urban Remote Sensing Event (JURSE).

[12]  Ilhan Aslan,et al.  Towards quantifying forest recreation: Exploring outdoor thermal physiology and human well-being along exemplary pathways in a central European urban forest (Augsburg, SE-Germany) , 2020 .

[13]  S. Fuss,et al.  Crowding in Germany's national parks: the case of the low mountain range Saxon Switzerland National Park , 2013 .

[14]  N. Strange,et al.  Childhood experience in forest recreation practices: Evidence from nine European countries , 2019 .

[15]  Roland Kays,et al.  Coupling visitor and wildlife monitoring in protected areas using camera traps , 2017 .

[16]  L. Brander,et al.  Spatial dimensions of recreational ecosystem service values: A review of meta-analyses and a combination of meta-analytic value-transfer and GIS , 2018, Ecosystem Services.

[17]  Marco A. Wehrmeister,et al.  Using Deep Learning and Low-Cost RGB and Thermal Cameras to Detect Pedestrians in Aerial Images Captured by Multirotor UAV , 2018, Sensors.

[18]  Haitao Zhu,et al.  Underwater Image Processing and Object Detection Based on Deep CNN Method , 2020, J. Sensors.

[19]  H. Job Estimating the regional economic impact of tourism to national parks - two case studies from Germany. , 2008 .

[20]  Bart Kranstauber,et al.  Camera traps as sensor networks for monitoring animal communities , 2009, 2009 IEEE 34th Conference on Local Computer Networks.

[21]  Pietro Perona,et al.  Pedestrian Detection: An Evaluation of the State of the Art , 2012, IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence.

[22]  W. Haider,et al.  Evaluating Visitor-Monitoring Techniques: A Comparison of Counting and Video Observation Data , 2005, Environmental management.

[23]  Michael S. Lew,et al.  Deep learning for visual understanding: A review , 2016, Neurocomputing.

[24]  Jesús Francisco Vargas-Bonilla,et al.  Towards automatic wild animal monitoring: Identification of animal species in camera-trap images using very deep convolutional neural networks , 2016, Ecol. Informatics.

[25]  Martin Müller,et al.  The economic impact of tourism in six German national parks , 2010 .

[26]  P. Fredman,et al.  Managers' experiences of visitor monitoring in Swedish outdoor recreational areas , 2016 .

[27]  Andreas Muhar,et al.  Monitoring options for visitor numbers in national parks and natural areas , 2003 .

[28]  V. Hartje,et al.  Monitoring recreation across European nature areas : A geo-database of visitor counts, a review of literature and a call for a visitor counting reporting standard , 2017 .

[29]  M. Mayer,et al.  Assessing and valuing the recreational ecosystem services of Germany’s national parks using travel cost models , 2018, Ecosystem Services.

[30]  C. Lintott,et al.  Snapshot Serengeti, high-frequency annotated camera trap images of 40 mammalian species in an African savanna , 2015, Scientific Data.

[31]  Xiao Xiang Zhu,et al.  Semantic segmentation of slums in satellite images using transfer learning on fully convolutional neural networks , 2019, ISPRS Journal of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing.

[32]  Ali Farhadi,et al.  YOLOv3: An Incremental Improvement , 2018, ArXiv.

[33]  O. Vistad,et al.  Visitor monitoring in nature areas : A manual based on experiences from the Nordic and Baltic countries , 2007 .

[34]  Benjamin Letham,et al.  Forecasting at Scale , 2018 .

[35]  Gianpaolo Francesco Trotta,et al.  Computer vision and deep learning techniques for pedestrian detection and tracking: A survey , 2018, Neurocomputing.

[36]  Michael Sinclair,et al.  Passive crowdsourcing of social media in environmental research: A systematic map , 2019, Global Environmental Change.

[37]  R. Haller,et al.  Publicity, economics and weather – changes in visitor numbers to a European National Park over 8 years , 2016 .

[38]  A. Hernando,et al.  Current knowledge and future research directions for the monitoring and management of visitors in recreational and protected areas , 2018 .

[39]  Zhihai He,et al.  Animal Scanner: Software for classifying humans, animals, and empty frames in camera trap images , 2019, Ecology and evolution.

[40]  Steven W. Running,et al.  Suitable Days for Plant Growth Disappear under Projected Climate Change: Potential Human and Biotic Vulnerability , 2015, PLoS biology.

[41]  Mikko Kolehmainen,et al.  Predictive System for Monitoring Regional Visitor Attendance Levels in Large Recreational Areas , 2009 .

[42]  A. Ghermandi,et al.  Valuing nature-based recreation using a crowdsourced travel cost method: A comparison to onsite survey data and value transfer , 2020 .

[43]  Marius Mayer,et al.  Using social media to estimate visitor provenance and patterns of recreation in Germany's national parks. , 2020, Journal of environmental management.

[44]  C. Pickering,et al.  Using social media to assess nature-based tourism: Current research and future trends , 2020, Journal of Outdoor Recreation and Tourism.

[45]  Joel A. Granados,et al.  Using phenocams to monitor our changing Earth: toward a global phenocam network , 2016 .

[46]  A. Urbani,et al.  Raw Cow Milk Bacterial Consortium as Bioindicator of Circulating Anti-Microbial Resistance (AMR) , 2020, Animals : an open access journal from MDPI.

[47]  M. Wilmking,et al.  The “carbon-neutral university” – a study from Germany , 2018 .