Search citation statements
Paper Sections
Citation Types
Year Published
Publication Types
Relationship
Authors
Journals
The quantification of bird mortality due to collision with power lines is complicated by the heterogeneity of survey methods used and the bias related to searching for carcasses on the ground (e.g., carcass persistence and imperfect detection by observers). To estimate the bias associated with ground search surveys, we conducted three 30‐d trials to test carcass persistence by placing and monitoring carcasses of red‐legged partridges (Alectoris rufa) and common pheasants (Phasianus colchicus) below power lines at 14 sites. We also conducted two detection experiments, testing the ability of 19 observers to detect bird carcasses. We used survival analysis and generalized linear mixed‐effects models to investigate the effects of site, habitat, carcass size, and survey period on both carcass persistence and detection. We also investigated the effect of carcass age on carcass persistence and the effect of the observer on carcass detection. Our findings show significant variations in carcass persistence between sites and survey periods, as well as significant interaction between these variables. The daily carcass persistence probability was highly variable between sites, with an up to eightfold variation. Carcass detection increased with increasing carcass size and was significantly affected by the microhabitat surrounding the carcass; it also varied between observers. These findings suggest that both carcass persistence and detection vary strongly and unpredictably at a small scale. As a result, conservation managers should be encouraged to conduct carcass persistence and detection experiments on sites where they aim to produce unbiased estimates of bird mortality below power lines, and these trials should be carried out in conditions similar to the mortality survey. A large‐scale, unbiased, and accurate estimate of bird collision mortality due to power lines may require substantial field effort, with a survey frequency of more than once a week.
The quantification of bird mortality due to collision with power lines is complicated by the heterogeneity of survey methods used and the bias related to searching for carcasses on the ground (e.g., carcass persistence and imperfect detection by observers). To estimate the bias associated with ground search surveys, we conducted three 30‐d trials to test carcass persistence by placing and monitoring carcasses of red‐legged partridges (Alectoris rufa) and common pheasants (Phasianus colchicus) below power lines at 14 sites. We also conducted two detection experiments, testing the ability of 19 observers to detect bird carcasses. We used survival analysis and generalized linear mixed‐effects models to investigate the effects of site, habitat, carcass size, and survey period on both carcass persistence and detection. We also investigated the effect of carcass age on carcass persistence and the effect of the observer on carcass detection. Our findings show significant variations in carcass persistence between sites and survey periods, as well as significant interaction between these variables. The daily carcass persistence probability was highly variable between sites, with an up to eightfold variation. Carcass detection increased with increasing carcass size and was significantly affected by the microhabitat surrounding the carcass; it also varied between observers. These findings suggest that both carcass persistence and detection vary strongly and unpredictably at a small scale. As a result, conservation managers should be encouraged to conduct carcass persistence and detection experiments on sites where they aim to produce unbiased estimates of bird mortality below power lines, and these trials should be carried out in conditions similar to the mortality survey. A large‐scale, unbiased, and accurate estimate of bird collision mortality due to power lines may require substantial field effort, with a survey frequency of more than once a week.
Midflight collisions with power lines impact 12 of the world’s 15 crane species, including 1 critically endangered species, 3 endangered species, and 5 vulnerable species. Power lines can be fitted with line markers to increase the visibility of wires to reduce collisions, but collisions can persist on marked power lines. For example, hundreds of Sandhill Cranes (Antigone canadensis) die annually in collisions with marked power lines at the Iain Nicolson Audubon Center at Rowe Sanctuary (Rowe), a major migratory stopover location near Gibbon, Nebraska. Mitigation success has been limited because most collisions occur nocturnally when line markers are least visible, even though roughly half the line markers present include glow-in-the-dark stickers. To evaluate an alternative mitigation strategy at Rowe, we used a randomized design to test collision mitigation effects of a pole-mounted near-ultraviolet light (UV-A; 380–395 nm) Avian Collision Avoidance System (ACAS) to illuminate a 258-m power line span crossing the Central Platte River. We observed 48 Sandhill Crane collisions and 217 dangerous flights of Sandhill Crane flocks during 19 nights when the ACAS was off, but just 1 collision and 39 dangerous flights during 19 nights when the ACAS was on. Thus, we documented a 98% decrease in collisions and an 82% decrease in dangerous flights when the ACAS was on. We also found a 32% decrease in the number of evasive maneuvers initiated within 25 m of the power line along the river, and a 71% increase in the number of evasive maneuvers initiated beyond 25 m when the ACAS was on. Sandhill Cranes reacted sooner and with more control, and experienced substantially fewer collisions, when the ACAS was on. Installation of the ACAS on other high-risk spans, and perhaps on other anthropogenic obstacles where birds collide, may offer a new solution to a long-running conservation dilemma.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.