Standard Paper

You have full text access to this OnlineOpen article

Is it worthwhile scaring geese to alleviate damage to crops? – An experimental study

  1. Caroline Ernberg Simonsen1,*,
  2. Jesper Madsen2,
  3. Ingunn M Tombre3 and
  4. Jacob Nabe-Nielsen1

Version of Record online: 7 JAN 2016

DOI: 10.1111/1365-2664.12604

This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non-commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.

Issue

Journal of Applied Ecology

Journal of Applied Ecology

Special Feature: Quantifying resilience

Volume 53, Issue 3, pages 916–924, June 2016


Additional Information

How to Cite

Simonsen, C. E., Madsen, J., Tombre, I. M., Nabe-Nielsen, J. (2016), Is it worthwhile scaring geese to alleviate damage to crops? – An experimental study. Journal of Applied Ecology, 53: 916–924. doi: 10.1111/1365-2664.12604

Author Information

  1. 1

    Department of Bioscience – Roskilde, Aarhus University, Roskilde, Denmark

  2. 2

    Department of Bioscience – Kalø, Aarhus University, Rønde, Denmark

  3. 3

    Arctic Ecology Department, Norwegian Institute for Nature Research, The Fram Centre, Tromsø, Norway

*Corresponding author. E-mail: ces@bios.au.dk

Publication History

  1. Issue online: 13 MAY 2016
  2. Version of Record online: 7 JAN 2016
  3. Accepted manuscript online: 15 DEC 2015 06:36AM EST
  4. Manuscript Accepted: 10 DEC 2015
  5. Manuscript Received: 31 MAY 2015

Funded by

  • Norwegian Research Council. Grant Number: 204342/E40
  • Norwegian Environment Agency
  • County Governor of Nord-Trøndelag
  • Aarhus University
  • The Fram Centre in Tromsø

SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

ARTICLE TOOLS

View Full Article (HTML) Enhanced Article (HTML) Get PDF (790K)Get PDF (790K)

Keywords:

  • agricultural conflict;
  • crop damage;
  • crop protection;
  • dose–response;
  • experimental scaring;
  • goose behaviour;
  • pink-footed goose Anser brachyrhynchus;
  • spring staging

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.
View Full Article (HTML) Enhanced Article (HTML) Get PDF (790K)Get PDF (790K)