Is it worthwhile scaring geese to alleviate damage to crops? – An experimental study
Summary 1.Increasing population sizes of geese are the cause of numerous agricultural conflicts in many regions of the Northern Hemisphere. Scaring is often used as a tool to chase geese away from fields, either as a means to protect vulnerable crops or as part of goose management schemes to drive g...
Published in: | Journal of Applied Ecology |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , , |
Format: | Article in Journal/Newspaper |
Language: | English |
Published: |
2015
|
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | http://hdl.handle.net/11250/2467702 https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2664.12604 |
id |
ftninstnf:oai:brage.nina.no:11250/2467702 |
---|---|
record_format |
openpolar |
spelling |
ftninstnf:oai:brage.nina.no:11250/2467702 2023-05-15T13:30:00+02:00 Is it worthwhile scaring geese to alleviate damage to crops? – An experimental study Simonsen, Caroline Ernberg Madsen, Jesper Tombre, Ingunn Nabe-Nielsen, Jacob 2015 application/pdf http://hdl.handle.net/11250/2467702 https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2664.12604 eng eng Norges forskningsråd: 204342 urn:issn:0021-8901 http://hdl.handle.net/11250/2467702 https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2664.12604 cristin:1311721 Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 Internasjonal http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/deed.no CC-BY-NC-ND 916–924 53 Journal of Applied Ecology agricultural conflict crop damage crop protection dose–response experimental scaring goose behaviour pink-footed goose Anser brachyrhynchus spring staging VDP::Matematikk og Naturvitenskap: 400::Zoologiske og botaniske fag: 480 Journal article Peer reviewed 2015 ftninstnf https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2664.12604 2021-12-23T07:17:05Z Summary 1.Increasing population sizes of geese are the cause of numerous agricultural conflicts in many regions of the Northern Hemisphere. Scaring is often used as a tool to chase geese away from fields, either as a means to protect vulnerable crops or as part of goose management schemes to drive geese to accommodation areas. Geese are quick to habituate to stationary scaring devices; hence, active scaring by humans is often employed. However, it remains undocumented how much effort is required for active scaring to be effective. 2.We explored the relationship between intensity of active human scaring on field use and behaviour by geese. Using an experimental framework, we applied four different scaring doses per day (geese were scared either 2, 5, 7 or 10 times per day), to random pastures in a pink-footed goose spring staging area in mid-Norway, and recorded goose flock sizes, fleeing response distances, and average weekly goose densities assessed by dropping densities. In addition, we counted droppings in fields without scaring. We used mixed models to test for changes in the effects of different scaring doses over time and compared observed with predicted dropping levels. 3.Cumulative dropping densities increased at different rates depending on the scaring dose. Scaring dosage did not affect flock size and fleeing response distance during the study period, but both flock sizes and fleeing response distances changed with time. 4.Scaring dose 2 did not show any decrease in relative goose use compared to the fields without scaring, whereas doses 5, 7 and 10 all showed 74–78% fewer droppings by the end of the spring staging period, indicating a possible threshold between dose 2 and 5. The largest effect of scaring appeared during the first week of scaring. 5.Synthesis and applications. This study is the first to show a dose–response relationship between active scaring and field use of flocking geese. For individual farmers, the study provides guidance on the level of scaring effort needed to be cost-effective. If implemented as part of a management scheme with subsidy/accommodation areas in combination with systematic and persistent scaring, it can be used as a tool to keep geese away from areas where they are not wanted, thereby assisting in the alleviation of goose–agriculture conflicts. The approach in this study can be adapted and used in a wider range of wildlife interactions with human economic interests. publishedVersion Article in Journal/Newspaper Anser brachyrhynchus Pink-footed Goose Norwegian Institute for Nature Research: Brage NINA Norway Journal of Applied Ecology 53 3 916 924 |
institution |
Open Polar |
collection |
Norwegian Institute for Nature Research: Brage NINA |
op_collection_id |
ftninstnf |
language |
English |
topic |
agricultural conflict crop damage crop protection dose–response experimental scaring goose behaviour pink-footed goose Anser brachyrhynchus spring staging VDP::Matematikk og Naturvitenskap: 400::Zoologiske og botaniske fag: 480 |
spellingShingle |
agricultural conflict crop damage crop protection dose–response experimental scaring goose behaviour pink-footed goose Anser brachyrhynchus spring staging VDP::Matematikk og Naturvitenskap: 400::Zoologiske og botaniske fag: 480 Simonsen, Caroline Ernberg Madsen, Jesper Tombre, Ingunn Nabe-Nielsen, Jacob Is it worthwhile scaring geese to alleviate damage to crops? – An experimental study |
topic_facet |
agricultural conflict crop damage crop protection dose–response experimental scaring goose behaviour pink-footed goose Anser brachyrhynchus spring staging VDP::Matematikk og Naturvitenskap: 400::Zoologiske og botaniske fag: 480 |
description |
Summary 1.Increasing population sizes of geese are the cause of numerous agricultural conflicts in many regions of the Northern Hemisphere. Scaring is often used as a tool to chase geese away from fields, either as a means to protect vulnerable crops or as part of goose management schemes to drive geese to accommodation areas. Geese are quick to habituate to stationary scaring devices; hence, active scaring by humans is often employed. However, it remains undocumented how much effort is required for active scaring to be effective. 2.We explored the relationship between intensity of active human scaring on field use and behaviour by geese. Using an experimental framework, we applied four different scaring doses per day (geese were scared either 2, 5, 7 or 10 times per day), to random pastures in a pink-footed goose spring staging area in mid-Norway, and recorded goose flock sizes, fleeing response distances, and average weekly goose densities assessed by dropping densities. In addition, we counted droppings in fields without scaring. We used mixed models to test for changes in the effects of different scaring doses over time and compared observed with predicted dropping levels. 3.Cumulative dropping densities increased at different rates depending on the scaring dose. Scaring dosage did not affect flock size and fleeing response distance during the study period, but both flock sizes and fleeing response distances changed with time. 4.Scaring dose 2 did not show any decrease in relative goose use compared to the fields without scaring, whereas doses 5, 7 and 10 all showed 74–78% fewer droppings by the end of the spring staging period, indicating a possible threshold between dose 2 and 5. The largest effect of scaring appeared during the first week of scaring. 5.Synthesis and applications. This study is the first to show a dose–response relationship between active scaring and field use of flocking geese. For individual farmers, the study provides guidance on the level of scaring effort needed to be cost-effective. If implemented as part of a management scheme with subsidy/accommodation areas in combination with systematic and persistent scaring, it can be used as a tool to keep geese away from areas where they are not wanted, thereby assisting in the alleviation of goose–agriculture conflicts. The approach in this study can be adapted and used in a wider range of wildlife interactions with human economic interests. publishedVersion |
format |
Article in Journal/Newspaper |
author |
Simonsen, Caroline Ernberg Madsen, Jesper Tombre, Ingunn Nabe-Nielsen, Jacob |
author_facet |
Simonsen, Caroline Ernberg Madsen, Jesper Tombre, Ingunn Nabe-Nielsen, Jacob |
author_sort |
Simonsen, Caroline Ernberg |
title |
Is it worthwhile scaring geese to alleviate damage to crops? – An experimental study |
title_short |
Is it worthwhile scaring geese to alleviate damage to crops? – An experimental study |
title_full |
Is it worthwhile scaring geese to alleviate damage to crops? – An experimental study |
title_fullStr |
Is it worthwhile scaring geese to alleviate damage to crops? – An experimental study |
title_full_unstemmed |
Is it worthwhile scaring geese to alleviate damage to crops? – An experimental study |
title_sort |
is it worthwhile scaring geese to alleviate damage to crops? – an experimental study |
publishDate |
2015 |
url |
http://hdl.handle.net/11250/2467702 https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2664.12604 |
geographic |
Norway |
geographic_facet |
Norway |
genre |
Anser brachyrhynchus Pink-footed Goose |
genre_facet |
Anser brachyrhynchus Pink-footed Goose |
op_source |
916–924 53 Journal of Applied Ecology |
op_relation |
Norges forskningsråd: 204342 urn:issn:0021-8901 http://hdl.handle.net/11250/2467702 https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2664.12604 cristin:1311721 |
op_rights |
Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 Internasjonal http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/deed.no |
op_rightsnorm |
CC-BY-NC-ND |
op_doi |
https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2664.12604 |
container_title |
Journal of Applied Ecology |
container_volume |
53 |
container_issue |
3 |
container_start_page |
916 |
op_container_end_page |
924 |
_version_ |
1766004792652464128 |