2008
DOI: 10.1071/wr07081
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Some human, aircraft and animal factors affecting aerial surveys: how to enumerate animals from the air

Abstract: Aerial surveys of wildlife involve a noisy platform carrying one or more observers moving over animals in order to quantify their abundance. This simple-sounding system encapsulates limits to human visual acuity and human concentration, visual attention, salience of target objects within the viewed scene, characteristics of survey platforms and facets of animal behaviours that affect the detection of animals by the airborne observers. These facets are too often ignored in aerial surveys, yet are inherent sourc… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

1
58
0

Year Published

2008
2008
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 44 publications
(59 citation statements)
references
References 62 publications
1
58
0
Order By: Relevance
“…As an alternative to ground-observer counts, Booth et al (2009) tested the efficacy of aerially photographing active leks to obtain lek counts but concluded it was not effective. In general, aerial surveys can produce misleading results largely on the basis of the speed of the aircraft, time limitations, and an observer's capability to locate animals, and remember and maintain concentration among other biases (Caughley 1974;Fleming and Tracey 2008). Detection of animals using IR technology has become a valuable tool for image-based data collection.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As an alternative to ground-observer counts, Booth et al (2009) tested the efficacy of aerially photographing active leks to obtain lek counts but concluded it was not effective. In general, aerial surveys can produce misleading results largely on the basis of the speed of the aircraft, time limitations, and an observer's capability to locate animals, and remember and maintain concentration among other biases (Caughley 1974;Fleming and Tracey 2008). Detection of animals using IR technology has become a valuable tool for image-based data collection.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The speed of an aircraft allows greater coverage, but entails an increased chance of missing target objects in the search strip. As near-line objects pass through the field of view up to 4x faster than objects near-horizon (Fleming and Tracey 2008), higher altitude allows more time for visual detection. On the other hand, if higher altitude imposes a nontrivial distance between observer and objects below, it reverts to the same drawback brought about by lower altitude, which reduces distance to target objects, but affords less time to process sightings from the air (Buckland et al 2001).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The Hughes 500D can carry one front-seat and two rear-seat observers (although these were not used in our study) whereas the Robinson R22 can carry one frontseat observer. Our protocol involved the observer and pilot searching for animals, and the experience/skills of these two people would likely be an important determinant of the number of animals observed (Beard 1999;Fleming & Tracey 2008;Griffin et al 2013). Factors other than the underlying 'true' ungulate density, amount of cover and observer experience could also contribute to variation in helicopter counts of ungulates.…”
Section: Helicopter Count Protocolmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…standing or bedded), amount of snow cover, topography, and time of day could all influence helicopter counts (e.g. Tracey et al 2005;Fleming & Tracey 2008;Rice et al 2009). Further work is required to quantify the importance of factors other than the underlying true ungulate density on helicopter counts in New Zealand.…”
Section: Helicopter Count Protocolmentioning
confidence: 99%