  Survival is a key life history parameter that can inform management decisions
and basic life history research. Because true survival is often confounded with
permanent and temporary emigration from the study area, many studies resort to
estimating apparent survival (i.e., probability of surviving and remaining
inside the study area), which can be much lower than true survival for highly
mobile species. One popular method for estimating true survival is the Barker
joint live-recapture/live-resight (JLRLR) model, which combines capture data
from a study area (hereafter the capture site) with resighting data from a
broader geographic area. This model assumes resightings are spatially
widespread to encompass the species range, an assumption that may not be
realistic for widely dispersing species. Here we use simulation to evaluate
survival bias from a JLRLR model under study design scenarios that differ in
the site selection for resights: global, random, fixed including the capture
site, and fixed excluding the capture site. Simulation results indicate that
fixed designs that included the capture site showed negative survival bias,
whereas fixed designs that excluded the capture site exhibited positive
survival bias. The magnitude of the bias was dependent on movement and
survival, where scenarios with high survival and frequent movement had minimal
bias. We developed a multistate version of the JLRLR and demonstrated
reductions in survival bias compared to the single-state version for most
designs. To minimize bias, our results suggest: 1) using a random resight
design when feasible and global sampling is not possible, 2) using the
multistate JLRLR model when appropriate, 3) including the capture site in the
resight sampling frame when possible, and 4) reporting survival as apparent
survival if fixed sites are used for resight with the single state JLRLR model.
