Effects of disturbance on geese in Svalbard: implications for regulating increasing tourism

Abstract

Tourism in the Arctic archipelago of Svalbard, Norway, has increased significantly in the last decade. Cruise ships make landings all around the archipelago, and there are numerous snowmobile, boat and hiking excursions. We describe disturbance effects on the three geese species that breed in Svalbard: the pink‐footed goose (Anser brachyrhynchus), the barnacle goose (Branta leucopsis) and the light‐bellied brent goose (Branta bernicla hrota). All three are regarded as highly vulnerable to disturbance. Behavioural responses by geese to humans on foot were analysed by estimating the distances at which geese become alerted, the escape flight distances and the length of escape flights, during pre‐nesting, nesting and brood‐rearing periods. We evaluate the consequences of human intrusion on the reproductive success in breeding colonies. During all three phases, pink‐footed geese responded at longer ranges, and flew/ran longer distances, than both brent and barnacle geese: when disturbed on the nest site, both male and female pink‐footed geese flew far away, resulting in a high rate of nest loss to avian predators (35%), compared with the 4 and 0% losses among barnacle and brent geese, respectively. During brood rearing, families of pink‐footed geese escaped at an average distance of 1717 m, compared with distances of 620 and 330 m for brent and barnacle geese, respectively. Even though bird sanctuaries have been established on several islets, with no human access during nesting, many core areas for the three species remain without restrictions, such as islets used by brent geese and slopes and valleys with nesting pink‐footed geese, brood‐rearing areas and moulting grounds for non‐breeding geese. We propose regulations of human access to goose concentration areas, and address the need to better protect these significant areas. We also discuss the need for further research on the vulnerability of geese to human activity.

Mayfield estimates versus apparent nest success in colonial geese

“…For example, inclusion of only 1 additional nest check to the sampling protocol for incubation plots at Karrak Lake would require double the personnel, adding substantial cost and logistical challenges, and increase disturbance to nests. Similar to findings of Sedinger (), increased disturbance associated with sampling for Mayfield estimation did not strongly influence nest survival in this study, although reduced disturbance has been shown to be beneficial in other situations (Bentzen et al , Madsen et al , Rizzolo et al , Gibson et al , Meixell and Flint ). The extent to which the discrepancy between apparent and Mayfield estimates is problematic can depend on the purpose of study.…”

“…Disturbance of nests by researchers can negatively affect nest survival (Bentzen et al , Madsen et al , Rizzolo et al , Gibson et al , Meixell and Flint ) by exposing nests to predators after displacement of parents, or by inducing abandonment. We investigated the influence of disturbance (disturb) by researchers using the model (year×age+disturb), with an index variable included in the design matrix of Program MARK that was set to 1 on the day after the nest was visited and 0 on other days.…”

“…Temporal variation in nest survival is typical of birds (Klett and Johnson , Liebezeit et al , Smith and Wilson , Iles et al , MacDonald et al ), and seasonal increases in nest survival (Dinsmore et al , Stephens et al ) have been attributed to heterogeneity in nest site quality because nests with higher visibility to potential predators are depredated first (Klett and Johnson ). As well, many studies have reported negative effects of nest disturbance by researchers on nest survival (Bentzen et al , Madsen et al , Rizzolo et al , Gibson et al , Meixell and Flint ) through temporary nest exposure to predators after displacement of the parents, or by inducing abandonment. Any effects of disturbance by researchers on nest survival are important to estimate for bias adjustment and to potentially improve field techniques.…”

Primary productivity and anthropogenic disturbance as determinants of Upland Goose Chloephaga picta distribution in southern Patagonia

“…Geese are highly sensitive to human disturbance, even when this does not involve persecution or habitat transformation. For example, escape flights as a response to tourist presence may significantly increase the rate of nest predation (Madsen et al 2009), and disturbance from traffic decreases feeding time in suitable pasturelands and results in habitat loss (Gill et al 1996). Southern Patagonia is one of the most remote and least populated areas in the world.…”

High-Arctic nesting geese occupying less favourable nest sites are more vulnerable to predation

“…Vegetation is characterized by Cassiope tetragona and Dryas octopetala dwarf shrubs on the slopes (Elvebakk 1997) and fen, marsh and moss tundra where freshwater accumulates (Vanderpuye et al 2002). The location of pink-footed carcasses, nesting success assessments and nest-site characteristic data were all collected after hatching because the pink-footed goose is particularly shy of humans, with nest losses after human disturbance known to be over one-third (Madsen et al 2009).…”