Monitoring GPS‐collared moose by ground versus drone approaches: efficiency and disturbance effects

• Published in: Wildlife Biology
• Main Authors: Mayer, Martin, Furuhovde, Erlend, Nordli, Kristoffer, Myriam Ausilio, Giorgia, Wabakken, Petter, Eriksen, Ane, Evans, Alina L., Mathisen, Karen Marie, Zimmermann, Barbara
• Format: Article in Journal/Newspaper
• Language: English
• Published: Wiley 2024
• Subjects: Alces alces
• Online Access: http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/wlb3.01213

Efficient wildlife management requires precise monitoring methods, for example to estimate population density, reproductive success, and survival. Here, we compared the efficiency of drone (equipped with a RGB camera) and ground approaches to detect and observe GPS‐collared female moose Alces alces and their calves. We also quantified how drone (n = 42) and ground (n = 41) approaches affected moose behavior and space use (n = 24 individuals). The average time used for drone approaches was 17 min compared to 97 min for ground approaches, with drone detection probability being higher (95% of adult female moose and 88% of moose calves) compared to ground approaches (78% of adult females and 82% of calves). Drone detection success increased at lower drone altitudes (50–70 m). Adult female moose left the site in 35% of drone approaches (with > 40% of those moose becoming disturbed once the drone hovered < 50 m above ground) compared to 56% of ground approaches. We failed to find short‐term effects (3 h after approaches) of drone approaches on moose space use, but moose moved > fourfold greater distances and used larger areas after ground approaches (compared to before the approaches had started). Similarly, longer‐term (24 h before and after approaches) space use did not differ between drone approaches compared to days without known disturbance, but moose moved comparatively greater distances during days of ground approaches. In conclusion, we could show that drone approaches were highly efficient to detect adult moose and their calves in the boreal forest, being faster and less disturbing than ground approaches, making them a useful tool to monitor and study wildlife.