Avian Electrocutions in Western Rajasthan, India

Harness, Richard E.; Juvvadi, Pranay Rao; Dwyer, James F.

doi:10.3356/jrr-13-00002.1

Cited by 31 publications

(31 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Large birds of prey that use power lines for perching are highly susceptible to electrocution (Bevanger , Lehman et al ). Electrocution of birds at power lines is a long‐standing and widespread phenomenon, affecting numerous avian species across several continents including Africa (Ledger and Annegarn , Jenkins et al , Angelov et al ), the Americas (Lehman et al , Kemper et al , Dwyer et al ), Asia (Dixon et al , Harness et al ), Australasia (Fox and Wynn ), and Europe (Ferrer et al , Tintό et al 2010). High levels of mortality combined with the unfavorable conservation status of certain raptors species means that electrocution has the potential to have a major impact on the population of certain species (Hernández‐Matías et al ).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Mitigation techniques to reduce avian electrocution rates

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

From August 2013, we undertook a 1-year trial of mitigation techniques at an electricity power line in the Mongolian steppe with a high avian electrocution rate. We examined 2 mitigation methods at phase-1 conductors on the top of power poles (i.e., reconfiguration of the insulator mount and insulation covers on the conductor wire) and 3 mitigation methods at phase-2 and 3 conductors on pole cross-arms (i.e., perch deflector brushes, rotating-mirror perch deterrents, and insulation covers on the conductor wires). The perch management techniques selected for the trial are currently widely adopted by power line managers in Mongolia. In comparison with the control, with no mitigation, electrocution rates were reduced both by the reconfiguration of insulator mounts and insulation of conductor wires at phase-1, though the reduction was greater for the former-73% mean reduction for reconfigured mounts and 59% for insulation covers. Electrocution rates were reduced by the placement of rotating-mirrors and insulation of conductor wires at phases 2 and 3, with the reduction being greater for the former-91% mean reduction for mirrors and 66% for insulation covers. Deployment of metal perch deflector brushes at phases 2 and 3 had no effect on electrocution rates and should not be used as mitigation. Most electrocutions occurred at phase 1 on the top of the pole, indicating that mitigation should be prioritized at this phase. In terms of cost and efficacy, reconfigured mounts represented the best option as a permanent fix at phase 1. At phases on cross-arms, the relative merits of mirrors and insulation covers need to be assessed over a longer period, and these temporary mitigation measures should be compared with alternative permanent fixes.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Mitigation techniques to reduce avian electrocution rates

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A decade after the Lehman et al () review of raptor electrocution, numerous advances have improved the understanding of factors influencing golden eagle electrocutions. For example, recent studies have simplified electrocution risk modeling to assist prioritization of retrofitting at the utility and regional levels (Harness et al ; Dwyer et al , ). At least 24 utilities in 9 western states have implemented these risk assessment techniques to target retrofitting actions, including investor‐owned, municipal, cooperative, and federal utilities (Harness et al , Dwyer et al ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Though retrofitting best practices are updated regularly (Olendorff et al ; APLIC , ), and research into electrocution mitigation is ongoing (Harness et al ; Dwyer et al , ), there is no recent comprehensive summary of electrocution risks for golden eagles. Lehman et al () conducted a global review of raptor electrocution including literature on golden eagle electrocution.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Additionally, new poles are not always required to be built to eagle-friendly standards, even when located in eagle habitat (Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers 2016). Though retrofitting best practices are updated regularly (Olendorff et al 1981;APLIC 1996APLIC , 2006, and research into electrocution mitigation is ongoing (Harness et al 2013;Dwyer et al , 2016a, there is no recent comprehensive summary of electrocution risks for golden eagles. Lehman et al (2007a) conducted a global review of raptor electrocution including literature on golden eagle electrocution.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Review and synthesis of research investigating golden eagle electrocutions

et al. 2018

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetos) electrocution on power poles is a global conservation problem with an estimated 504 eagles electrocuted annually in North America alone. Despite widespread use of mitigation techniques to retrofit existing poles and to build new poles to avian‐friendly standards, electrocution remains a leading anthropogenic cause of death for the golden eagle. To assist electric utilities, wildlife managers, and the public in understanding eagle electrocution risk, we reviewed and synthesized risk factors and mitigation techniques from published literature from 1940 to 2016. Eagles have 8 electrocution risk factors: pole design, eagle age, morphology, land cover and topography, prey availability, season, weather, and behavior. Pole configuration was the most frequently identified electrocution risk factor and electrocution incidents were most often associated with distribution level (<69 kV) equipment poles. Age was the second most frequently identified risk factor, with juvenile eagles electrocuted at approximately twice the rate of subadults or adults. Risk was also associated with large body size, high‐quality habitat, high prey density, winter dispersal, inclement weather, and intraspecific interactions. Risk modeling based on these factors may assist electric utilities and other stakeholders in identification of high‐risk poles at the regional scale. High‐risk poles need prioritization for retrofitting by electric utilities. Compensatory mitigation funding becoming available through eagle take permitting may be useful in offsetting costs to utilities. Electrocution mitigation efforts strategized by region to target high‐risk poles could result in substantial reductions of golden eagle annual mortalities. © 2018 The Wildlife Society.

show abstract

“…Additionally, many raptor species have unfavorable conservation statuses (BirdLife International, 2004;IUCN, 2015). Electrocution has an impact on the populations of many raptor species in Europe López-López et al, 2011;Guil et al, 2015), America (Bevanger, 1994;Lehman et al, 2010;Harness and Wilson, 2001), Africa (Kruger et al, 2004;Boshoff et al, 2011;Angelov et al, 2013), Asia (Goroshko, 2011;Harness et al, 2013) and Oceania (Fox and Wynn, 2010). Nonetheless, the extent to which electrocution drives population dynamics has only been precisely calculated for a few species over small ranges (Schaub et al, 2010).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 96%