Noise level correlates with manatee use of foraging habitats

Author Posting. © Acoustical Society of America, 2007. This article is posted here by permission of Acoustical Society of America for personal use, not for redistribution. The definitive version was published in Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 121 (2007): 3011-3020, doi:10.1121/1.2713555.The introduction of anthropogenic sound to coastal waters is a negative side effect of population growth. As noise from boats, marine construction, and coastal dredging increases, environmental and behavioral monitoring is needed to directly assess the effect these phenomena have on marine animals. Acoustic recordings, providing information on ambient noise levels and transient noise sources, were made in two manatee habitats: grassbeds and dredged habitats. Recordings were made over two 6-month periods from April to September in 2003 and 2004. Noise levels were calculated in one-third octave bands at nine center frequencies ranging from 250 Hz to 64 kHz. Manatee habitat usage, as a function of noise level, was examined during four time periods: morning, noon, afternoon, and night. Analysis of sightings data in a variety of grassbeds of equal species composition and density indicate that manatees select grassbeds with lower ambient noise for frequencies below 1 kHz. Additionally, grassbed usage was negatively correlated with concentrated boat presence in the morning hours; no correlation was observed during noon and afternoon hours. This suggests that morning boat presence and its associated noise may affect the use of foraging habitat on a daily time scale.This research was supported by a P.E.O. Scholar Award and National Defense Science and Engineering Graduate Fellowship awarded to Jennifer Miksis

Predator-prey Dynamics of Bald Eagles and Glaucous-winged Gulls at Protection Island, Washington, USA

1. Bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) populations in North America rebounded in the latter part of the twentieth century, the result of tightened protection and outlawing of pesticides such as DDT. An unintended consequence of recovery may be a negative impact on seabirds. During the 1980s, few bald eagles disturbed a large glaucous‐winged gull (Larus glaucescens) colony on Protection Island, Washington, USA, in the Salish Sea. Breeding gull numbers in this colony rose nearly 50% during the 1980s and early 1990s. Beginning in the 1990s, a dramatic increase in bald eagle activity ensued within the colony, after which began a significant decline in gull numbers. 2. To examine whether trends in the gull colony could be explained by eagle activity, we fit a Lotka–Volterra‐type predator–prey model to gull nest count data and Washington State eagle territory data collected in most years between 1980 and 2016. Both species were assumed to grow logistically in the absence of the other. 3. The model fits the data with generalized R2 = 0.82, supporting the hypothesis that gull dynamics were due largely to eagle population dynamics. 4. Point estimates of the model parameters indicated approach to stable coexistence. Within the 95% confidence intervals for the parameters, however, 11.0% of bootstrapped parameter vectors predicted gull colony extinction. 5. Our results suggest that the effects of bald eagle activity on the dynamics of a large gull colony were explained by a predator–prey relationship that included the possibility of coexistence but also the possibility of gull colony extinction. This study serves as a cautionary exploration of the future, not only for gulls on Protection Island, but for other seabirds in the Salish Sea. Managers should monitor numbers of nests in seabird colonies as well as eagle activity within colonies to document trends that may lead to colony extinction

Does the Order of Invasive Species Removal Matter? The Case of the Eagle and the Pig

Invasive species are recognized as a primary driver of native species endangerment and their removal is often a key component of a conservation strategy. Removing invasive species is not always a straightforward task, however, especially when they interact with other species in complex ways to negatively influence native species. Because unintended consequences may arise if all invasive species cannot be removed simultaneously, the order of their removal is of paramount importance to ecological restoration. In the mid-1990s, three subspecies of the island fox Urocyon littoralis were driven to near extinction on the northern California Channel Islands owing to heightened predation by golden eagles Aquila chrysaetos. Eagles were lured to the islands by an abundant supply of feral pigs Sus scrofa and through the process of apparent competition pigs indirectly facilitated the decline in foxes. As a consequence, both pigs and eagles had to be removed to recover the critically endangered fox. Complete removal of pigs was problematic: removing pigs first could force eagles to concentrate on the remaining foxes, increasing their probability of extinction. Removing eagles first was difficult: eagles are not easily captured and lethal removal was politically distasteful.Using prey remains collected from eagle nests both before and after the eradication of pigs, we show that one pair of eagles that eluded capture did indeed focus more on foxes. These results support the premise that if the threat of eagle predation had not been mitigated prior to pig removal, fox extinction would have been a more likely outcome.If complete eradication of all interacting invasive species is not possible, the order in which they are removed requires careful consideration. If overlooked, unexpected consequences may result that could impede restoration

Behaviour of Solitary Adult Scandinavian Brown Bears (Ursus arctos) when Approached by Humans on Foot

Successful management has brought the Scandinavian brown bear (Ursus arctos L.) back from the brink of extinction, but as the population grows and expands the probability of bear-human encounters increases. More people express concerns about spending time in the forest, because of the possibility of encountering bears, and acceptance for the bear is decreasing. In this context, reliable information about the bear's normal behaviour during bear-human encounters is important. Here we describe the behaviour of brown bears when encountering humans on foot. During 2006–2009, we approached 30 adult (21 females, 9 males) GPS-collared bears 169 times during midday, using 1-minute positioning before, during and after the approach. Observer movements were registered with a handheld GPS. The approaches started 869±348 m from the bears, with the wind towards the bear when passing it at approximately 50 m. The bears were detected in 15% of the approaches, and none of the bears displayed any aggressive behaviour. Most bears (80%) left the initial site during the approach, going away from the observers, whereas some remained at the initial site after being approached (20%). Young bears left more often than older bears, possibly due to differences in experience, but the difference between ages decreased during the berry season compared to the pre-berry season. The flight initiation distance was longer for active bears (115±94 m) than passive bears (69±47 m), and was further affected by horizontal vegetation cover and the bear's age. Our findings show that bears try to avoid confrontations with humans on foot, and support the conclusions of earlier studies that the Scandinavian brown bear is normally not aggressive during encounters with humans

Use of European hare (Lepus europaeus) carcasses by an avian scavenging assemblage in Patagonia

We studied the use of European hare (Lepus europaeus) carcasses by avian scavengers in Argentinean Patagonia. A total of 16 hare carcasses were placed in locations that could be observed without disturbing birds feeding on them. Six avian species fed on these carcasses: chimango caracara (Milvago chimango), crested caracara (Polyborus plancus), black vulture (Coragyps atratus), grey eagle-buzzard (Geranoaetus melanoleucus), red-backed hawk (Buteo polyosoma) and cinereous harrier (Circus cinereus). Turkey vultures (Cathartes aura), although abundant, never fed on the hare carcasses. The Andean condor also did not feed on the carcasses. Mammals visited hare carcasses on only two occasions. Of the hare carcasses, 69% were fully consumed during the first day of exposure and 25% in two days. There was no difference in the time elapsed from the placement of the carcass and its detection by crested and chimango caracaras. There were similar time periods from detection to first arrival, and time elapsed from first arrival to the start of feeding at the carcass by crested and chimango caracaras. Hare body parts were consumed in different proportions by crested and chimango caracaras whereas black vultures consumed the whole carcass. Interspecific hierarchies at the carcass in a decreasing sequence of dominance were crested caracara > black vulture > chimango caracara, coinciding with that expected from a body mass perspective. The scavenging species that consume hare carcasses did not show a clear pattern denoting they were a highly interdependent assemblage in the way described for scavengers in AfricaPeer reviewe