Citizen Science Observations Reveal Long-Term Population Trends of Common and Pacific Loon in Urbanized Alaska

Abstract

For more than 30 y, the Alaska Loon Watch (1985–1999) and the Alaska Loon and Grebe Watch (2000–2015) engaged citizen scientist participants to record more than 10,000 observations of common loons Gavia immer and Pacific loons Gavia pacifia at 346 lakes in five subregions of southcentral Alaska. We used generalized linear mixed models to estimate long-term trends in adult loon counts and chick survival and examined environmental variables associated with loon abundance. Adult common loon counts increased in all five subregions by 0.6–3.6% annually, whereas Pacific loons decreased 3% in the Anchorage subregion, but otherwise had trends not distinguishable from zero. Lake area was positively associated with common loon abundance and negatively associated with Pacific loon abundance. We also noted an inverse relationship between common loon and Pacific loon presence, consistent with the premise of interspecific competition. We did not find strong relationships between loon presence and predictor variables indicative of human disturbance or lakeshore development. Estimates of chick survival over time also revealed no clear pattern, although common loon chicks showed a decline in survival over the study period in one subregion. Citizen science programs provide agencies with a cost-effective tool to collect data over large spatial and temporal extents, which may not be feasible otherwise. However, there are ramifications of common data deficiencies associated with casual or unstructured observations, which can violate the assumptions required for rigorous statistical analysis. The implementation of a carefully predefined sampling protocol can avoid sampling bias, eliminate stringent assumptions, and ensure higher information content of citizen science data.

Crowdsourcing Global Perspectives in Ecology Using Social Media

“…However, there is a continuum of approaches between the two ends of this spectrum in which both organization and open contributions can exist. For example, in ecology, efforts have including both opportunistic cataloging of species distributions, water quality, and coral reef health (e.g., Marshall et al, 2012;Sullivan et al, 2014;Poisson et al, 2020;Ver Hoef et al, 2021) to targeted investigations of specific locations with more narrowly defined study objectives (e.g., McDuffie et al, 2019;Tang et al, 2020;Heres et al, 2021). We see the major benefits of intermediate approaches as: facilitating connections between networks of scientists that would not normally interact, providing opportunities for early career and underrepresented groups of scientists with perspectives that are muted by traditional approaches, faster knowledge dissemination that can spark creativity and new ideas in others, and generating multidisciplinary ideas that can only emerge when broad perspectives are synthesized.…”

Crowdsourcing global perspectives in ecology using social media

“…However, there is a continuum of approaches between the two ends of this spectrum in which both organization and open contributions can exist. For example, in ecology, efforts have including both opportunistic cataloguing of species distributions, water quality, and coral reef health (e.g., Marshall et al, 2012;Sullivan et al, 2014;Poisson et al, 2020;Ver Hoef et al, 2021) to targeted investigations of specific locations with more narrowly defined study objectives (e.g., McDuffie et al, 2019;Tang et al, 2020;Heres et al, 2021). We see the major benefits of intermediate approaches as: facilitating connections between networks of scientists that would not normally interact, providing opportunities for early career and underrepresented groups of scientists with perspectives that are muted by traditional approaches, faster knowledge dissemination that can spark creativity and new ideas in others, and generating multidisciplinary ideas that can only emerge when broad perspectives are synthesized.…”