More management, less damage? With increasing population size, economic costs of managing geese to minimize yield losses may outweigh benefits

• Main Authors: de Jager, Monique, Buitendijk, Nelleke H., Wiegers, J.N.(Yannick), Baveco, J. (Hans) M., Nolet, Bart A.
• Format: Article in Journal/Newspaper
• Language: English
• Published: 2024
• Subjects: Barnacle goose; Branta leucopsis
• Online Access: https://pure.knaw.nl/portal/en/publications/c9712416-f47c-4882-98a0-a392f7250822; https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2023.119949; https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11755/c9712416-f47c-4882-98a0-a392f7250822

Conflicts between farmers and geese are intensifying; yet, it remains unclear how interactions between goose population size and management regimes affect yield loss and economic costs. We investigate the cost-effectiveness of accommodation and scaring areas in relation to barnacle goose (Branta leucopsis) population size. We use an existing individual-based model of barnacle geese foraging in nature, accommodation, and scaring areas in Friesland, the Netherlands, to study the most cost-effective management under varying population sizes (i.e., between 20 and 200% of the current size). Our study shows that population size non-linearly affects yield loss costs and total costs per goose. The most cost-effective management scenario for intermediate to large populations is to avoid scaring of geese. For small populations, intensive scaring resulted in minimized yield loss costs and total costs, but also substantially lower goose body mass. Our results strongly suggest that scaring becomes a less effective management measure as goose populations increase.