Flights of drones over sub-Antarctic seabirds show species- and status-specific behavioural and physiological responses

Weimerskirch, Henri; Prudor, Aurélien; Schull, Quentin

doi:10.1007/s00300-017-2187-z

Cited by 105 publications

(149 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

137

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Disturbance has been linked to suppression of key demographic parameters, such as reproductive success and is considered a conservation threat in some ecosystems and to some species (Weston, ). Concern specifically exists regarding disturbance of wildlife by drones (Mulero‐Pázmány et al, ; Weimerskirch, Prudor, & Schull, ); in some instances, the frequency and intensity of the escape behaviour evoked by drones means they are considered to have merit as a wildlife deterrent (Egan, ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Escape responses of terrestrial and aquatic birds to drones: Towards a code of practice to minimize disturbance

Weston

O’Brien

Kostoglou

et al. 2020

Journal of Applied Ecology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Advances in human technology can lead to widespread and rapid increases in interactions between wildlife and potentially disturbing stimuli. The recreational use of drones is widespread and increasing, yet laws and codes of practice which aim to manage deleterious impacts (e.g. negative interactions with wildlife) are reactionary, unscientific and inadequate. One prominent potential negative effect of drones interacting with birds is disturbance; the disruption of normal states caused by responses such as escape. We measure avian escape responses to an approaching drone (n = 561 across 22 species) to inform the development of a code of practice to manage drone‐induced disturbance. Approaches were made at a relatively high and low altitude (10 and 4 m), and at different take‐off distances, both of which are candidate prescriptions for a code of practice. Flight‐initiation distance varied between species, but not between the altitudes tested. The probability of eliciting an escape response was high, and 14.6% higher at the lower altitude (at which 88.4% of overflies resulted in an escape response). Our response rates (from terrestrial and aquatic species) are higher than those reported for different birds in other places, most of which were water or seabirds. The probability of a drone take‐off in itself eliciting a response was low (<20%) when the drone take‐off was >40 m away, and decreased further with increasing distance from birds, with no escapes occurring >120 m. Policy implications. For our sample, no drone take‐off closer than 100 m, and no flight within 100 m would eliminate the vast majority of escape responses by birds. Required separation distances between drones and wildlife may exceed those required for other human activities, such as for walkers.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Documentation of avian response distances and factors influencing responses to drones has been explicitly recommended (Vas, Lescroel, Duriez, Boguszewski, & Grémillet, ), but is currently only available for a handful of taxa, most of which are wetland birds or seabirds (e.g. Weimerskirch et al, ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Escape responses of terrestrial and aquatic birds to drones: Towards a code of practice to minimize disturbance

Weston

O’Brien

Kostoglou

et al. 2020

Journal of Applied Ecology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, as the birds in the survey were semicaptive this could have influenced the results as they are more adjusted to human disturbance, and the authors acknowledge the flying height may be different depending on the species and the breeding status. Weimerskirch, Prudor, and Schull () explored the impact of flying height on 11 seabird species on the Crozet Islands, Southern Indian Ocean. They found that at 50 m, there was minimal disturbance with only one species showing a reaction, whereas at 10 m, all species demonstrated behavioral stresses, but again, the response was species‐dependent with some showing little behavioral response when flying at <5 m. Brisson‐Curadeau et al.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Can drones count gulls? Minimal disturbance and semiautomated image processing with an unmanned aerial vehicle for colony‐nesting seabirds

Rush

Clarke

Stone

et al. 2018

Ecology and Evolution

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Accurate counts of wild populations are essential to monitor change through time, but some techniques demand specialist surveyors and may result in unacceptable disturbance or inaccurate counts. Recent technological developments in unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) offer great potential for a range of survey and monitoring approaches. They literally offer a bird's‐eye view, but this increased power of observation presents the challenge of translating large amounts of imagery into accurate survey data. Seabirds, in particular, present the particular challenges of nesting in large, often inaccessible colonies that are difficult to view for ground observers, which are commonly susceptible to disturbance. We develop a protocol for carrying out UAV surveys of a breeding seabird colony (Lesser Black‐backed Gulls, Larus fuscus) and subsequent image processing to provide a semiautomated classification for counting the number of birds. Behavioral analysis of the gull colonies demonstrated that minimal disturbance occurred during UAV survey flights at an altitude of 15 m above ground level, which provided high‐resolution imagery for analysis. A protocol of best practice was developed using the expertise from both a UAV perspective and that of a dedicated observer. A GIS‐based semiautomated classification process successfully counted the gulls, with a mean agreement of 98% and a correlation of 99% with manual counts of imagery. We also propose a method to differentiate between the different gull species captured by our survey. Our UAV survey and analysis approach provide accurate counts (when comparing manual vs. semi‐automated counts taken from the UAV imagery) of a wild seabird population with minimal disturbance, with the potential to expand this to include species differentiation. The continued development of analytical and survey tools whilst minimizing the disturbance to wild populations is both key to unlocking the future of the rapid advances in UAV technology for ecological survey.

show abstract

“…, Weimerskirch et al . , Verfuss et al . ), especially in marine settings where observation had been mostly limited to vessel‐based or airborne observers.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

New views of humpback whale flow dynamics and oral morphology during prey engulfment

Werth

Kosma

Chenoweth

et al. 2019

Marine Mammal Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The rise of inexpensive, user‐friendly cameras and editing software promises to revolutionize data collection with minimal disturbance to marine mammals. Video sequences recorded by aerial drones and GoPro cameras provided close‐up views and unique perspectives of humpback whales engulfing juvenile salmon at or just below the water surface in Southeast Alaska and Prince William Sound. Although humpback feeding is famous for its flexibility, several stereotyped events were noted in the 47 lunges we analyzed. Engulfment was rapid (mean 2.07 s), and the entrance through which the tongue inverts into the ventral pouch was seen as water rushes in. Cranial elevation was a major contributor to gape, and pouch contraction sometimes began before full gape closure, with reverberating waves indicating rebounding flow of water within the expanded pouch. Expulsion of filtered water began with a small splash at the anterior of the mouth, followed by sustained excurrent flow in the mouth's central or posterior regions. Apart from a splash of rebounding water, water within the mouth was surprisingly turbulence‐free during engulfment, but submersion of the whale's head created visible surface whirlpools and vortices which may aggregate prey for subsequent engulfment.

show abstract

Flights of drones over sub-Antarctic seabirds show species- and status-specific behavioural and physiological responses

Cited by 105 publications

References 20 publications

Escape responses of terrestrial and aquatic birds to drones: Towards a code of practice to minimize disturbance

Escape responses of terrestrial and aquatic birds to drones: Towards a code of practice to minimize disturbance

Can drones count gulls? Minimal disturbance and semiautomated image processing with an unmanned aerial vehicle for colony‐nesting seabirds

New views of humpback whale flow dynamics and oral morphology during prey engulfment

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About