Data from: Scaring waterfowl as a management tool: how much more do geese forage after disturbance?
With increasing numbers of many herbivorous waterfowl species, often foraging on farmland, the conflict with agriculture has intensified. One popular management tool is to scare birds off the land, often in association with shooting. However, the energy costs of flying are considerably higher than t...
Gespeichert in:
Hauptverfasser: | , , , |
---|---|
Format: | Dataset |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext bestellen |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | With increasing numbers of many herbivorous waterfowl species, often
foraging on farmland, the conflict with agriculture has intensified. One
popular management tool is to scare birds off the land, often in
association with shooting. However, the energy costs of flying are
considerably higher than those of resting. Therefore, when birds fly off
after a disturbance, they use extra energy that subsequently needs to be
compensated. We used the white-fronted goose Anser albifrons, the most
common (grass-eating) goose wintering in western Europe, as a model
species. We measured flight durations by high-frequency accelerometer
recordings over 2 × 24 h in nine focal geese that were only incidentally
disturbed. We also made direct observations on these days to determine
whether the flight durations were reliably recorded. Using both a simple
and a more realistic model of the energy balance, we calculated the extra
grass consumption resulting from additional intentional disturbances. On
average, the geese flew daily 2 × 323 s (from and to their roosting sites
at 3200 m) and furthermore took to the air 5·3 times during a day (and 1·9
times a night). Multiplied with the average flight durations of 195 s,
this gives a total flying time of almost 0·6 h day−1 and a total foraging
time of 7·4 h day−1. The extra foraging time needed to compensate for
additional intentional disturbances strongly depends on the frequency of
such disturbances and the following flight duration. If, for example,
flights when intentionally disturbed are twice as long (2 × 195 s), the
extra foraging time will be 3·7% day−1 (2·3–3·2% day−1 in the more
realistic model) for each intentional disturbance, and the geese will no
longer be able to cover their energy requirements when intentionally
disturbed six times per day. Synthesis and applications. Recent
experiments suggest that geese have to be scared frequently in order to
reduce goose visitation to particular fields. With an intentional
disturbance rate, for example, of five times a day, the birds'
compensation for the increased energy expenditure will lead to a higher
overall consumption of grass of 11·5–16% day−1. Accommodation schemes have
to take such increases in total grass consumption into account when
deciding on the refuge areas to be set aside. |
---|---|
DOI: | 10.5061/dryad.n4m05 |