Hareport hazard: Identifying hare activity patterns and increased mammal–aircraft strike risk at an International Airport

Abstract Reported strike events between wildlife and aircraft are hazardous to aircraft and airfield operations and are increasing globally. To develop effective mitigation strategies, the relative hazard a species poses to aircraft, as well as information relating to its life history, are key to the development of effective mitigation strategies in Wildlife Hazard Management Plans. However, given the complex nature of airfield environments with access restrictions and the presence of sensitive equipment, the collection of high‐quality ecological data can be difficult. Here we use motion‐activated camera traps to collect activity data on a population of Irish hares (Lepus timidus hibernicus) inhabiting the airfield at Dublin International Airport, to investigate the link between hare activity and aircraft activity in relation to hare strikes. Camera traps revealed that the hare population at the airfield largely displayed a bimodal crepuscular activity pattern, with activity peaking at sunrise and at sunset. Recorded hare strike times at the airfield were closely associated with hare activity times with a high temporal overlap between these datasets. In comparison, hare activity and aircraft movement activity had a moderate overlap across all seasons, with strikes peaking at times with low aircraft movements. We demonstrate the importance of understanding the circadian and seasonal activity patterns of hazardous species at airfields for targeted strike mitigation

Management and control of invasive brown hares (Lepus europaeus): contrasting attitudes of selected environmental stakeholders and the wider rural community

Management of wildlife is often a contentious issue in which stakeholders are increasingly influential. The European hare (Lepus europaeus) is a non-native invasive species, now established in Northern Ireland. The European hare impacts the endemic Irish hare (L. timidus hibernicus), a priority species of conservation concern, via competition and hybridisation to the extent that control of European hares is a priority. We conducted a questionnaire survey among members of Countryside Alliance Ireland (CAI)—an organisation that promotes rural interests, including field sports—and non-members, to ascertain the contrasting attitudes to the lethal control of European hares in Northern Ireland; a total of 342 (20%) questionnaires were returned. We hypothesised that: (i) CAI members would exhibit greater support for intervention than non-members; and (ii) respondents in the core invasive range will differ in their outlook when compared to respondents from other zones. CAI members were more likely to be aware of the presence of the non-native species and to support lethal management. Both groups considered the threat posed to biodiversity by the European hare to be important. We conclude that members of rural interest groups may be important advocates of intervention, whilst non-members of field sports organisations may be more reluctant to support any proposed management plan involving lethal control. Active engagement to develop a mutual understanding, prior to developing management options, is crucial in ensuring long-term success