Fatality monitoring at wind projects requires carcass detection trials to adjust fatality estimates for the proportion of fatalities not found. However, detection trials vary greatly in metric, duration, carcass monitoring schedule, species, number placed, state of decomposition, whether placed within or outside search areas, and other factors. We introduce a new approach for estimating fatalities by quantifying overall detection rates rather than separate rates for searcher detection error and carcass persistence, and by leaving placed and found fatality carcasses undisturbed throughout monitoring. We placed 2 fresh‐frozen bird carcasses weekly at random sites within fatality search areas and on randomized days Monday–Friday at Sand Hill and Santa Clara wind projects, Altamont Pass Wind Resource Area, California, USA. To estimate detection rates, we used logit regression to fit detection outcomes on body mass, which served as an axis of similitude between placed trial carcasses and fatality finds. Adjusted carcass placement rates among species detected by searchers regressed on true placement rates with a slope of 1.0 so long as sufficient numbers of trial carcasses were placed, thus validating our approach as an unbiased estimator. Our approach generally estimated lower fatality rates than did conventional approaches, the latter of which demonstrated biases in searcher detection rates and carcass persistence rates whether based on proportion of carcasses remaining or mean days to removal. Our approach also revealed detection errors that highlight the difficulty of finding and identifying the remains of dead animals, and which warrant routine reporting. Despite averaging only a 5‐day search interval on intensively grazed annual grasslands where ground visibility was usually high, our experienced fatality monitors averaged 4.3 searches/first carcass detection, failed to detect 25% of 75 species represented by placed carcasses, and misidentified carcasses to species among 44% of species detected. Estimates of time since death also suffered bias and large error. Our approach more realistically simulates carcass detection probabilities associated with fatality monitoring, is less costly, facilitates hypothesis testing, eliminates multiple sources of error and bias suspected of conventional methods, and enables quantification of errors in estimated time since death, species identifications, and false negative findings. © 2018 The Wildlife Society.
As wind turbine‐caused mortality of birds and bats increases with increasing wind energy capacity, accurate fatality estimates are needed to assess effects, identify collision factors, and formulate mitigation. Finding a larger proportion of collision victims reduces the magnitude of adjustment for the proportion not found, thus reducing opportunities for bias. We tested detection dogs in trials of bat and small‐bird carcasses placed randomly in routine fatality monitoring at the Buena Vista and Golden Hills Wind Energy projects, California, USA, 2017. Of trial carcasses placed and confirmed available before next‐day fatality searches, dogs detected 96% of bats and 90% of small birds, whereas humans at a neighboring wind project detected 6% of bats and 30% of small birds. At Golden Hills dogs found 71 bat fatalities in 55 searches compared to 1 bat found by humans in 69 searches within the same search plots over the same season. Dog detection rates of trial carcasses remained unchanged with distance from turbine, and dogs found more fatalities than did humans at greater distances from turbines. Patterns of fatalities found by dogs within search plots indicated 20% of birds and 4–14% of bats remained undetected outside search plots at Buena Vista and Golden Hills. Dogs also increased estimates of carcass persistence by finding detection trial carcasses that the trial administrator had erroneously concluded were removed. Compared to human searches, dog searches resulted in fatality estimates up to 6.4 and 2.7 times higher for bats and small birds, respectively, along with higher relative precision and >90% lower cost per fatality detection. © 2020 The Authors. The Journal of Wildlife Management published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of The Wildlife Society.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.