scholarly journals Waterbird counts on large water bodies: comparing ground and aerial methods during different ice conditions

PeerJ ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 6 ◽  
pp. e5195 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dominik Marchowski ◽  
Łukasz Jankowiak ◽  
Łukasz Ławicki ◽  
Dariusz Wysocki

The aerial and ground methods of counting birds in a coastal area during different ice conditions were compared. Ice coverage of water was an important factor affecting the results of the two methods. When the water was ice-free, more birds were counted from the ground, whereas during ice conditions, higher numbers were obtained from the air. The first group of waterbirds with the smallest difference between the two methods (average 6%) contained seven species: Mute Swan Cygnus olor, Whooper Swan Cygnus cygnus, Greater Scaup Aythya marila, Tufted Duck Aythya fuligula, Common Goldeneye Bucephala clangula, Smew Mergellus albellus and Goosander Mergus merganser; these were treated as the core group. The second group with a moderate difference (average 20%) included another six species: Mallard Anas platyrhynchos, Eurasian Wigeon Mareca penelope, Common Pochard Aythya ferina, Great Crested Grebe Podiceps cristatus and Eurasian Coot Fulica atra. The third group with a large difference (average 85%) included five species, all of the Anatini tribe: Gadwall Mareca strepera, Northern Pintail Anas acuta, Northern Shoveler Spatula clypeata, Eurasian Teal Anas crecca and Garganey Spatula querquedula. During ice conditions, smaller numbers of most species were counted from the ground. The exception here was Mallard, more of which were counted from the ground, but the difference between two methods was relatively small in this species (7.5%). Under ice-free conditions, both methods can be used interchangeably for the most numerous birds occupying open water (core group) without any significant impact on the results. When water areas are frozen over, air counts are preferable as the results are more reliable. The cost analysis shows that a survey carried out by volunteer observers (reimbursement of travel expenses only) from the land is 58% cheaper, but if the observers are paid, then an aerial survey is 40% more economical.

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dominik Marchowski ◽  
Łukasz Jankowiak ◽  
Łukasz Ławicki ◽  
Dariusz Wysocki

The paper compares the aerial and ground methods of counting birds in a coastal area during different ice conditions. Ice coverage of waters was the most important factor affecting the results of the two methods. When the water was ice-free, more birds were counted from the ground, whereas during ice conditions, higher numbers were obtained from the air. In ice-free conditions the group of waterbirds with the smallest difference between the two methods (< 6%) contained six species: Greater Scaup, Smew, Mute Swan, Goosander, Common Goldeneye and Tufted Duck; the group with a moderate difference (15%-45%) included another six species: Eurasian Coot, Whooper Swan, Mallard, Eurasian Wigeon, Great Crested Grebe and Common Pochard; while the group with a large difference (> 68%) included five species, all of the genus Anas: Gadwall, Eurasian Teal, Northern Shoveler, Northern Pintail and Garganey. In ice conditions, smaller numbers of most species were counted from the ground, except for Mallard, where the difference between two methods was small (7.5%). Under ice-free conditions, both methods can be used interchangeably for the most numerous birds occupying open water without any great impact on the results. When water areas are frozen over, air counts are preferable as the results are more accurate. The cost analysis shows that a survey carried out by volunteer observers (reimbursement of travel expenses only) from the land is 58% cheaper, but if the observers are paid, then the aerial survey is 40% more economical.


2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dominik Marchowski ◽  
Łukasz Jankowiak ◽  
Łukasz Ławicki ◽  
Dariusz Wysocki

The paper compares the aerial and ground methods of counting birds in a coastal area during different ice conditions. Ice coverage of waters was the most important factor affecting the results of the two methods. When the water was ice-free, more birds were counted from the ground, whereas during ice conditions, higher numbers were obtained from the air. In ice-free conditions the group of waterbirds with the smallest difference between the two methods (< 6%) contained six species: Greater Scaup, Smew, Mute Swan, Goosander, Common Goldeneye and Tufted Duck; the group with a moderate difference (15%-45%) included another six species: Eurasian Coot, Whooper Swan, Mallard, Eurasian Wigeon, Great Crested Grebe and Common Pochard; while the group with a large difference (> 68%) included five species, all of the genus Anas: Gadwall, Eurasian Teal, Northern Shoveler, Northern Pintail and Garganey. In ice conditions, smaller numbers of most species were counted from the ground, except for Mallard, where the difference between two methods was small (7.5%). Under ice-free conditions, both methods can be used interchangeably for the most numerous birds occupying open water without any great impact on the results. When water areas are frozen over, air counts are preferable as the results are more accurate. The cost analysis shows that a survey carried out by volunteer observers (reimbursement of travel expenses only) from the land is 58% cheaper, but if the observers are paid, then the aerial survey is 40% more economical.


Acrocephalus ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 35 (160-161) ◽  
pp. 73-83
Author(s):  
Luka Božič

Summary In 2014, the International Waterbird Census (IWC) was carried out in Slovenia on 18 and 19 Jan. Waterbirds were counted on all larger rivers, along the entire Slovenian Coastland and on most of the major standing waters in the country. During the census, in which 268 observers took part, 413 sections of the rivers and coastal sea with a total length of 1395.1 km and 226 other localities (178 standing waters and 48 streams) were surveyed. Altogether, 45,346 waterbirds of 62 species were counted. This is the lowest number of waterbirds recorded after the 1997 and 1998 censuses. The greatest numbers of waterbirds were counted in the Drava count area, i.e. 20,217 individuals (44.6% of all waterbirds in Slovenia). By far the most numerous species was Mallard Anas platyrhynchos (43.0% of all waterbirds), followed by Black-headed Gull Chroicocephalus ridibundus (10.1% of all waterbirds), Coot Fulica atra (7.9% of all waterbirds), Yellow-legged Gull Larus michahellis (6.0% of all waterbirds) and Cormorant Phalacrocorax carbo (4.6% of all waterbirds). The number of 1,000 counted individuals was also surpassed by Mute Swan Cygnus olor, Pochard Aythya ferina, Tufted Duck Ay. fuligula and Teal An. crecca. Among the rarer recorded species, the Black Stork Ciconia nigra (registered for the first time during the January Waterbird Censuses; only the second winter record in Slovenia), Cattle Egret Bubulcus ibis and Flamingo Phoenicopterus roseus (both registered only for the second time during the IWC) should be given a special mention. Numbers of the following species were the highest so far recorded during the IWC: Shelduck Tadorna tadorna, Muscovy Duck Cairina moschata, Shoveler An. clypeata, Redthroated Loon Gavia stellata and Pygmy Cormorant Phalacrocorax pygmeus. Also, the total number of C and E category species/taxa was the highest to date, although still quite low with 70 individuals. Numbers of the following species were the lowest so far recorded during the IWC: Cormorant, Little Grebe Tachybaptus ruficollis and Green Sandpiper Tringa ochropus


Acrocephalus ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 36 (164-165) ◽  
pp. 57-67
Author(s):  
Luka Božič

In 2015, the International Waterbird Census (IWC) was carried out in Slovenia on 17 and 18 Jan. Waterbirds were counted on all larger rivers, along the entire Slovenian Coastland and on most of the major standing waters in the country. During the census, in which 276 observers took part, 409 sections of the rivers and coastal sea with a total length of 1385.8 km and 224 other localities (172 standing waters and 52 streams) were surveyed. Altogether, 46,425 waterbirds of 57 species were counted. This is one of the lowest numbers of waterbirds recorded during the 19 years of IWC in Slovenia. The highest numbers of waterbirds were counted in the Drava count area, i.e. 17,014 individuals (36.7% of all waterbirds in Slovenia). By far the most numerous species was Mallard Anas platyrhynchos (45.9% of all waterbirds), followed by Coot Fulica atra (8.4% of all waterbirds), Blackheaded Gull Chroicocephalus ridibundus (7.5% of all waterbirds), Cormorant Phalacrocorax carbo (5.7% of all waterbirds) and Mute Swan Cygnus olor (4.6% of all waterbirds). The number of 1000 counted individuals was also surpassed by Tufted Duck Aythya fuligula, Yellow-legged Gull Larus michahellis and Teal An. crecca. Among the rarer recorded species, the Cattle Egret Bubulcus ibis (registered only for the third time during the IWC) and Lesser Black-backed Gull Larus fuscus (registered only for the fourth time during the IWC) deserve special mention. Also, Ruddy Shelduck Tadorna ferruginea was recorded for the fourth time during the IWC, but the individual observed was classified to category E (introduced species without self-sustaining populations, escapees from captivity). Numbers of the following species were the highest so far recorded during the IWC: Greylag Goose Anser anser, Muscovy Duck Cairina moschata, Shoveler An. clypeata, Goosander Mergus merganser and Common Sandpiper Actitis hypoleucos. The number of Redbreasted Mergansers M. serrator was the lowest so far recorded during the IWC.


Acrocephalus ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 38 (174-175) ◽  
pp. 203-215
Author(s):  
Luka Božič

Summary In 2017, the International Waterbird Census (IWC) was carried out in Slovenia on January 14 and 15. Waterbirds were counted on all larger rivers, along the entire Slovenian Coastland and on most of the major standing waters in the country. During the census, in which 235 observers took part, 413 sections of the rivers and coastal sea with a total length of 1,427 km and 200 other localities (164 standing waters and 36 streams) were surveyed. The census was characterized by harsh winter conditions and high proportion of frozen water bodies. Altogether, 51,790 waterbirds of 61 species were counted. Thus, the number of waterbirds and the number of species recorded were close to the 21-year average. The highest numbers of waterbirds were counted in the Drava count area, i.e. 20,064 individuals (38.7% of all waterbirds in Slovenia). By far the most numerous species was Mallard Anas platyrhynchos (46.1% of all waterbirds), followed by Coot Fulica atra (6.8% of all waterbirds), Cormorant Phalacrocorax carbo (5.9% of all waterbirds), Black-headed Gull Chroicocephalus ridibundus (5.7% of all waterbirds) and Mute Swan Cygnus olor (3.9% of all waterbirds). The number of 1,000 counted individuals was also surpassed by Yellow-legged Gull Larus michahellis, Teal An. crecca, Tufted Duck Aythya fuligula, White-fronted Goose Anser albifrons, Pygmy Cormorant P. pygmeus and Grey Heron Ardea cinerea. Among the rarer recorded species, the Red-breasted Goose Branta ruficollis (registered for the first time during the January Waterbird Censuses and only for the third time ever in Slovenia) and Barnacle Goose Branta leucopsis (the first probable A category individual for IWC and Slovenia) deserve special mention. Numbers of the following species were the highest so far recorded during the IWC: Mandarin Duck Aix galericulata (together with 2006 and 2012), Pintail An. acuta, Ferruginous Duck Ay. nyroca, Long-tailed Duck Clangula hyemalis (together with 2003), Goosander Mergus merganser, Pygmy Cormorant, Herring Gull L. argentatus and Caspian Gull L. cachinnans. Number of Pochards Ay. ferina was the lowest so far recorded during the IWC.


Acrocephalus ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 35 (160-161) ◽  
pp. 5-23
Author(s):  
Katja Logar ◽  
Luka Božič

Abstract Between April 2007 and April 2008, 40 systematic waterbird counts were conducted on the Drava River between Lake Maribor and the Melje Dam (length 8.5 km, area 155 ha) to determine the specific composition, abundance and seasonal dynamics of bird occurrence. Between October and May, counts were conducted every week, whereas between June and September they were carried out once every two weeks. In total, 26,803 individuals of 30 species were counted. The number of waterbirds and diversity of species were the highest from late December to late February, when more than 1,000 individuals were regularly present in the area. Waterbirds were distributed along the river unequally, with the highest number of birds present yearround in the city centre and in the first counting sector of Lake Maribor. The Mallard Anas platyrhynchos and Mute Swan Cygnus olor were recorded during every count, while occurrence frequency was greater than 50% in another 10 species. Dominant species in terms of percentage composition were Mallard, Black-headed Gull Chroicocephalus ridibundus, Coot Fulica atra, Mute Swan, Pochard Aythya ferina and Tufted Duck Ay. fuligula. Mute Swan and Mallard were the only breeding waterbirds in the study area. Both the total number of waterbirds and the highest daily total in the first two counting sectors were greater between October and March 1992/93 than in our study. The decline in numbers was the greatest for Mallard, Pochard and Tufted Duck, while an increase was noted in Mute Swan and Yellow-legged / Caspian Gull Larus michahellis / cachinnans. The total number of waterbirds and the number of some species in the study area were significantly higher than expected solely based on its length compared to the length of the lowland Drava in Slovenia (125.7 km). The study area is conservationally important for Pochard, Tufted Duck and Black-headed Gull


1987 ◽  
Vol 33 (115) ◽  
pp. 330-340 ◽  
Author(s):  
Steven A Arcone ◽  
Allan J Delaney

AbstractThe ice-thickness profiling performance of a helicopter-mounted short-pulse radar operating at approximate center frequencies of 600 and 900 MHz was assessed. The antenna packages were mounted 1.2 m off the skid of a small helicopter whose speed and altitude were varied from about 1.8 to 9 m/s and 3 to 12 m. Clutter from the helicopter offered minimal interference with the ice data. Data were acquired in Alaska over lakes (as a proving exercise) and two rivers, whose conditions varied from open water to over 1.5 m of solid ice with numerous frazil-ice formations. The most readily interpretable data were acquired when the ice or snow surface was smooth. Detailed surface investigations on the Tanana River revealed good correlations of echo delay with solid ice depth, but an insensitivity to frazil-ice depth due to its high water content. On the Yukon River, coinciding temporally coherent surface and bottom reflections were associated with solid ice and smooth surfaces. All cases of incoherent surface returns (scatter) occurred over ice rubble. Rough-surface scattering was always followed by the appearance of bottom scattering but, in many cases, including a hanging-wall formation of solid frazil ice, bottom scattering occurred beneath coherent, smooth-surface reflections. Areas of incoherent bottom scattering investigated by drilling revealed highly variable ice conditions, including frazil ice. The minimum ice thickness that could be resolved from the raw data was about 0.2 m with the 600 MHz antenna and less than 0.15 m with the 900 MHz antenna.


Water ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (10) ◽  
pp. 2844
Author(s):  
Winnie Gerbens-Leenes ◽  
Santiago Vaca-Jiménez ◽  
Mesfin Mekonnen

This paper gives an overview of the contribution of water footprint (WF) studies on water for energy relationships. It first explains why water is needed for energy, gives an overview of important water energy studies until 2009, shows the contribution of Hoekstra’s work on WF of energy generation, and indicates how this contribution has supported new research. Finally, it provides knowledge gaps that are relevant for future studies. Energy source categories are: 1. biofuels from sugar, starch and oil crops; 2. cellulosic feedstocks; 3. biofuels from algae; 4. firewood; 5. hydropower and 6. various sources of energy including electricity, heat and transport fuels. Especially category 1, 3, 4, 5 and to a lesser extent 2 have relatively large WFs. This is because the energy source derives from agriculture or forestry, which has a large water use (1,2,4), or has large water use due to evaporation from open water surfaces (3,5). WFs for these categories can be calculated using the WF tool. Category 6 includes fossil fuels and renewables, such as photovoltaics and wind energy and has relatively small WFs. However, information needs to be derived from industry.


2016 ◽  
Vol 1 (4) ◽  
pp. 12-21
Author(s):  
V. E. Giragosov ◽  
M. M. Beskaravainy

The relevance of the study of hydrophilic birds in the urban areas of the Black Sea coast is due to their important role in the coastal biocoenosis structure and the need to preserve biodiversity in the conditions of anthropogenic transformation of Crimean coastal zone. The dynamics of species composition and abundance of birds in Kruglaya (Omega) Bay (Sevastopol) were investigated. The results of regular and episodic monitoring carried out in 1995 and 2005–2016 were used in this work. Quantitative accounting was carried out only in January and February (1–2 times per winter season) in 2005–2008, episodically in 2009–2013 and weekly in December — May 2014/2015 and September — May 2015/2016. Number of specimens per species was registered, and the ratio of young and adult specimens in mute swan (Cygnus olor), sex ratio in mallard (Anas platyrhynchos), common pochard (Aythya ferina) and tufted duck (Aythya fuligula) were determined. Russian and Latin names of birds are represented by L. S. Stepanian. Kruglaya Bay is one of Sevastopol bays which form the northern coastline of the Heraclea Peninsula, and it is a place of seasonal concentrations of hydrophilic birds. The basic morphometric characteristics of the bay are the following: the water area — 0.64 km2, length — 1.3 km, maximum width — 0.8 km, the average depth — 4.5 m. The water area of the bay did not freeze usually, only its inner part was covered with ice in extremely cold winters. Benthic macrophyte species are represented by two associations: Cystoseira crinita and C. barbata on stones and rocks, and Zostera noltii and Z. marina on sandy and silty areas. Two local areas of common reed (Phragmites australis) beds are located in the inner part of the bay. The zoobenthos is a significant part of the food supply of birds and includes 97 species, mainly polychaetes, molluscs and crustaceans. The ichthyofauna is represented by 42 fish species. 51 species of aquatic and semi-aquatic birds across 8 Orders were identified. The winter bird community was most diverse and numerous (32 species: 14 Anseriformes, 7 Charadriiformes, 5 Podicipediformes, 3 Gruiformes, 2 Pelecaniformes, 1 Gaviiformes). Eight species dominate regularly in winters and quantitatively — mute swan, mallard, common pochard, tufted duck, eurasian coot (Fulica atra), black-headed gull (Larus ridibundus), caspian gull (Larus cachinnans) and common gull (Larus canus). Rare species wintering in the Mountain Crimea, including horned grebe (Podiceps auritus), Bewick’s swan (Cygnus bewickii), red-breasted goose (Rufibrenta ruficollis), white-headed duck (Oxyura leucocephala), knot (Calidris canutus), is of great interest. The average ratio of young and adult mute swans in the main wintering period (December — February) was 61 : 39 % in 2014/2015 and 45 : 55 % in 2015/2016, respectively. The ratio of males and females were as follows: in mallard 49.5 : 50.5 % in 2014/2015, and 51.4 : 48.6 % in 2015/2016; in common pochard 54.8 : 45.2 % in 2014/2015, and 60.5 : 39.5 % in 2015/2016; in tufted duck 51.0 : 49.0 % in 2014/2015, and 51.4 : 48.6 % in 2015/2016, respectively. Formation of the winter bird community began in October, sometimes at the end of September when single specimens of mallard, coot, tufted duck, red-breasted merganser (Mergus serrator), black-necked grebe (Podiceps nigricollis) appeared. Common gull, great crested grebe (Podiceps cristatus) and the common pochard come flying in November; the mute swan appears at the beginning of December. Maximum and relatively stable number of most species was typical for January and the first half of February. Maximum number of specimens of all bird species was registered in January 13, 2015 (1288), and February 7, 2016 (1531 specimens). The feeding conditions of Kruglaya Bay allow overwintering of the birds with different feeding specializations. The benthophages (most of Anseriformes and Coot) rank first in species richness (at least 13 species) and in quantitative terms. Five species (black-throated diver (Gavia arctica), great cormorant (Phalacrocorax carbo), common sheg (Phalacrocorax aristotelis), red-breasted merganser, Sandwich tern (Thalasseus sandvicensis)) form the group of ichthyophages. The Grebes occupy an intermediate position between benthophages and ichthyophages: small fish and benthic invertebrates are present in their diet. Four species of gull (black-headed, Caspian, common, Mediterranean gull (Larus melanocephalus)) constitute a group of omnivores. The rare visitors in Kruglaya Bay are zoophagous and omnivorous birds foraging in the surf zone and at shallow depths, such as water rail (Rallus aquaticus), common moorhen (Gallinula chloropus), dunlin (Calidris alpina), knot (Calidris canutus), and herbivores which prefer to feed in terrestrial habitats — red-breasted goose (Rufibrenta ruficollis). The nutritional requirements of birds are compensated to a certain extent by additional feeding carried out by townspeople. In general 30 passing and nomadic species, mainly Charadriiformes (11), Anseriformes (7) and Ciconiiformes (5), were registered. A nesting bird community was absent, and only the nesting of little bittern (Ixobrychus minutus) was registered in 2016 for the first time in city zone. The spring migration took place from late February to May, the autumn migration — from August until the first decade of November. Kruglaya Bay is a valuable natural and ecological educational place and deserves status as a natural park.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Annett Bartsch

&lt;p&gt;Rain-on-snow modifies snow properties and can lead to the formation of ice crusts which impact wildlife and also vegetation. Events in the Arctic have been recently linked to specific sea ice conditions (longer open water season) for Siberia. Specifically microwave satellite data have been shown applicable for identification of such events across the Arctic. Related snow structure changes can be observed specifically over Scandinavia, northern European Russia and Western Siberia as well as Alaska (Bartsch, 2010). Events which had severe impacts for reindeer herder herding have occurred several times in the last two decades.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Challenges further include the categorization of severity of events and attribution of observations to rain-on-snow events.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Calibration and validation of detection schemes have been largely based on indirect measures. Usually a combination of air temperature and snow height measurements, supported by reports of such events are analysed.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;In this presentation, the utility of current calibration and validation approaches are discussed. Requirements towards in situ data from the viewpoint of satellite based retrievals are outlined.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Bartsch, A. Ten Years of SeaWinds on QuikSCAT for Snow Applications. Remote Sens. 2010, 2, 1142-1156.&lt;/p&gt;


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document