Taxon:
Branta leucopsis

No Thumbnail Available
Scientific Name
Branta leucopsis
Common Name
Barnacle Goose
Taxa Group
Anatidae
Environment
Move Mode

Filters

20222
Reset filters

Settings

Start date: 2020 × End date: 2022 ×

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • No Thumbnail Available
    Data package
    Data from: Effects of multiple targeted repelling measures on the behaviour of individually tracked birds in an area of increasing human-wildlife conflict
    (2022-09-29) Heim, Wieland; Piironen, Antti; Heim, Ramona Julia; Piha, Markus; Seimola, Tuomas; Forsman, Jukka T.; Laaksonen, Toni
    Some animal populations are rapidly increasing in numbers and expanding their ranges, leading to intensified human-wildlife conflicts. A wide range of tools has been developed to repel animals from areas where they are suspected to cause damage. For waterfowl, direct comparisons of multiple repelling methods have so far focused only on species´ presence, total numbers, cost effectiveness or subsequent damage assessments, but not on individual behaviour. Here, we investigated the individual responses of free-flying geese to three repelling methods using high-resolution tracking data. In an experimental setup, tracked individuals were repelled by human approach, gunshot sound or handheld lasers. We found that repelling success and return time to the field where the repelling took place increased when individuals were repelled multiple times. Travel distances after the repelling events were longer after human approach and gunshot sound compared to the handheld laser treatments. In spring, the probability to return to the same field was higher after repelling with handheld lasers, but no difference between treatments was evident in autumn. We observed no increase in the probability to visit accommodation fields, where geese were allowed to forage and were not repelled, after the repelling events. Synthesis and applications. We found no strong differences between the three methods regarding the repelling effectiveness and the resulting behaviour of the tracked geese. However, the higher return rates of individuals after repelling with handheld lasers in spring suggest that this method might be less effective in situations with bright sunlight or very large aggregations of geese. Apart from these limitations, we can recommend handheld lasers for repelling as they might reduce energetic losses for the geese and disturbance of non-target wildlife. Since repelling by gunshot sound and handheld lasers was twice as fast as repelling by human approach, those methods will reduce working hours by 50% and therefore be more cost-effective in practice.
  • No Thumbnail Available
    Data package
    Data from: Wild goose chase: geese flee high and far, and with aftereffects from New Year’s fireworks
    (2022-11-28) Kölzsch, Andrea; Lameris, Thomas K.; Müskens, Gerhard J.D.M.; Schreven, Kees H.T.; Buitendijk, Nelleke H.; Kruckenberg, Helmut; Moonen, Sander; Heinicke, Thomas; Cao, Lei; Madsen, Jesper; Wikelski, Martin; Nolet, Bart A.
    In the present Anthropocene, wild animals are globally affected by human activity. Consumer fireworks during New Year (NY) are widely distributed in W-Europe and cause strong disturbances that are known to incur stress responses in animals. We analyzed GPS tracks of 347 wild migratory geese of four species during eight NYs quantifying the effects of fireworks on individuals. We show that, in parallel with particulate matter increases, during the night of NY geese flew on average 5–16 km further and 40–150 m higher, and more often shifted to new roost sites than on previous nights. This was also true during the 2020–2021 fireworks ban, despite fireworks activity being reduced. Likely to compensate for extra flight costs, most geese moved less and increased their feeding activity in the following days. Our findings indicate negative effects of NY fireworks on wild birds beyond the previously demonstrated immediate response.