Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home

Drones as a Threat to Wildlife: YouTube Complements Science in Providing Evidence about Their Effect

  • Natalia Rebolo-Ifrán (a1), Maricel Graña Grilli (a1) and Sergio A Lambertucci (a1)

Summary

Although drones are becoming very common in the skies, most concerns about their use are not focused on their possible impact on wildlife. We used the information available from the scientific literature on the effects of drones on wildlife and complement it with Internet (YouTube) information to evaluate whether recreational activities using drones produce behavioural responses from wildlife. Scientific papers specifically evaluating the effects of drones on wildlife are scarce but increasing. Nonetheless, we found abundant videos in which many species from different taxonomic groups and multiple countries presented behavioural responses to drone overflights. Furthermore, 26% of the species that were disturbed are included in one of the International Union for Conservation of Nature categories of threat. We found that wildlife that use aerial and terrestrial habitats are more likely to show a behavioural response than those occupying aquatic habitats. The Internet is becoming a source of evidence of disturbances to wildlife that should be considered, particularly for recreational activities. We advocate for the use of technology, but argue that funding and effort should be devoted to evaluating drone impacts on wildlife. We call for educational programmes for laypeople who use drones for recreation and for more research and regulations on their use in sensitive wildlife areas.

Copyright

Corresponding author

*Author for correspondence: Natalia Rebolo-Ifrán, Email: nataliarebolo@comahue-conicet.gob.ar

References

Hide All
Anderson, K, Gaston, KJ (2013) Lightweight unmanned aerial vehicles will revolutionize spatial ecology. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 11: 138146.
APO-100 FAA (2018) FAA aerospace forecast: fiscal years 2018–2038 [www document]. URL www.faa.gov/data_research/aviation/aerospace_forecasts/media/FY2018-38_FAA_Aerospace_Forecast.pdf.
Arona, L, Dale, J, Heaslip, SG, Hammill, MO, Johnston, DW (2018) Assessing the disturbance potential of small unoccupied aircraft systems (UAS) on gray seals (Halichoerus grypus) at breeding colonies in Nova Scotia, Canada. PeerJ 6: e4467.
Barnas, AF, Felege, CJ, Rockwell, RF, Ellis-Felege, SN (2018a) A pilot(less) study on the use of an unmanned aircraft system for studying polar bears (Ursus maritimus). Polar Biology 41: 10551062.
Barnas, AF, Newman, R, Felege, CJ, Corcoran, MP, Hervey, SD, Stechmann, TJ, Rockwell, RF, Ellis-Felege, SN (2018b) Evaluating behavioral responses of nesting lesser snow geese to unmanned aircraft surveys. Ecology and Evolution 8: 13281338.
Bevan, E, Wibbels, T, Najera, BMZ, Martinez, MAC, Martinez, LAS, Martinez, FI, Cuevas, JM, Anderson, T, Bonka, A, Hernandez, MH, Pena, LJ, Burchfield, PM (2015) Unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) for monitoring sea turtles in near-shore waters. Marine Turtle Newsletter 145: 1922.
Brisson-Curadeau, É, Bird, D, Burke, C, Fifield, DA, Pace, P, Sherley, RB, Elliott, KH (2017) Seabird species vary in behavioural response to drone census. Scientific Reports 7: 17884.
Chabot, D, Bird, DM (2012) Evaluation of an off-the-shelf unmanned aircraft system for surveying flocks of geese. Waterbirds 35: 170174.
Chabot, D, Craik, SR, Bird, DM (2015) Population census of a large common tern colony with a small unmanned aircraft. PLoS ONE 10: e0122588.
Christie, KS, Gilbert, SL, Brown, CL, Hatfield, M, Hanson, L (2016) Unmanned aircraft systems in wildlife research: current and future applications of a transformative technology. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 14: 241251.
Canal, D, Negro, JJ (2018) Use of drones for research and conservation of birds of prey. In: Birds of Prey, pp. 325337. Cham, Switzerland: Springer.
Ditmer, MA, Vincent, JB, Werden, LK, Tanner, JC, Laske, TG, Iaizzo, PA, Garshelis, DL, Fieberg, JR (2015) Bears show a physiological but limited behavioral response to unmanned aerial vehicles. Current Biology 25: 22782283.
Dolbeer, RA (2006) Height distribution of birds recorded by collisions with civil aircraft. Journal of Wildlife Management 70: 13451350.
Drever, MC, Chabot, D, O’Hara, PD, Thomas, JD, Breault, A, Millikin, RL (2015) Evaluation of an unmanned rotorcraft to monitor wintering waterbirds and coastal habitats in British Columbia, Canada. Journal of Unmanned Vehicle Systems 3: 256267.
Dulava, S, Bean, WT, Richmond, OMW (2015) Environmental reviews and case studies: applications of unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) for waterbird surveys. Environmental Practice 17: 201210.
Durban, JW, Fearnbach, H, Perryman, WL, Leroi, DJ (2015) Photogrammetry of killer whales using a small hexacopter launched at sea. Journal of Unmanned Vehicle Systems 3: 15.
Dylewski, L, Mikula, P, Tryjanowski, P, Morelli, F, Yosef, R (2017). Social media and scientific research are complementary – YouTube and shrikes as a case study. The Science of Nature 104: 48.
Giones, F, Brem, A (2017) From toys to tools: the co-evolution of technological and entrepreneurial developments in the drone industry. Business Horizons 60: 875884.
Goebel, ME, Perryman, WL, Hinke, JT, Krause, DJ, Hann, NA, Gardner, S, LeRoi, DJ (2015) A small unmanned aerial system for estimating abundance and size of Antarctic predators. Polar Biology 38: 619630.
Hahn, N, Mwakatobe, A, Konuche, J, De Souza, N, Keyyu, J, Goss, M, Chang’A, A, Palminteri, S, Dinerstein, E, Olson, D (2017) Unmanned aerial vehicles mitigate human–elephant conflict on the borders of Tanzanian Parks: a case study. Oryx 51: 513516.
Hanson, L, Holmquist-johnson, CL, Cowardin, ML (2014) Evaluation of the Raven sUAS to Detect and Monitor Greater Sage-Grouse Leks within the Middle Park Population. U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2014–1205. Reston, VA, USA: US Geological Survey.
Hayes, B, Jones, C, Töpferm, E (2014) Eurodrones Inc. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Transnational Institute (TNI).
Hodgson, JC, Koh, LP (2016) Best practice for minimising unmanned aerial vehicle disturbance to wildlife in biological field research. Current Biology 26: R404R405.
Holldorf, E (2018). Avifauna Ethological Response to Unmanned Aircraft Systems [www document]. URL https://repository.usfca.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1815&context=capstone.
Hu, J, Wu, X, Dai, M (2018) Estimating the population size of migrating Tibetan antelopes Pantholops hodgsonii with unmanned aerial vehicles. Oryx 19.
Jiménez López, J, Mulero-Pázmány, M (2019) Drones for conservation in protected areas: present and future. Drones 3: 10.
Junda, JH, Greene, E, Zazelenchuk, D, Bird, DM (2016) Nest defense behaviour of four raptor species (osprey, bald eagle, ferruginous hawk and red-tailed hawk) to a novel aerial intruder – a small rotary-winged drone. Journal of Unmanned Vehicle Systems 4: 122.
Knight, RL, Gutzwiller, KJ, eds. (2013) Wildlife and Recreationists: Coexistence through Management and Research. Washington, DC, USA: Island Press.
Korczak-Abshire, M, Kidawa, A, Zmarz, A, Storvold, R, Karlsen, SR, Rodzewicz, M, Chwedorzewska, K, Znój, A (2016) Preliminary study on nesting Adélie penguins disturbance by unmanned aerial vehicles. CCAMLR Science 23: 116.
Koski, WR, Gamage, G, Davis, AR, Mathews, T, LeBlanc, B, Ferguson, SH (2015) Evaluation of UAS for photographic re-identification of bowhead whales, Balaena mysticetus . Journal of Unmanned Vehicle Systems 3: 2229.
Lambertucci, SA, Shepard, ELC, Wilson, R (2015) Human–wildlife conflicts in a crowded airspace. Science 348: 502504.
Lyons, M, Brandis, K, Callaghan, C, McCann, J, Mills, C, Ryall, S, Kingsford, R (2018) Bird interactions with drones, from individuals to large colonies. Australian Field Ornithology 35: 5156.
Markets and Markets (2018) Unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) drones market worth 48.88 billion USD by 2023 [www document]. URL www.marketsandmarkets.com/PressReleases/commercial-drones.asp.
McClelland, GTW, Bond, AL, Sardana, A, Glass, T (2016) Rapid population estimate of a surface-nesting seabird on a remote island using a low-cost unmanned aerial vehicle. Marine Ornitholog 44: 215220.
McEvoy, JF, Hall, GP, McDonald, PG (2016) Evaluation of unmanned aerial vehicle shape, flight path and camera type for waterfowl surveys: disturbance effects and species recognition. PeerJ 4: e1831.
McIntosh, RR, Holmberg, R, Dann, P (2018) Looking without landing – using remote piloted aircraft to monitor fur seal populations without disturbance. Frontiers in Marine Science 5: 202.
Moreland, EE, Cameron, MF, Angliss, RP, Boveng, PL (2015) Evaluation of a ship-based unoccupied aircraft system (UAS) for surveys of spotted and ribbon seals in the Bering Sea pack ice. Journal of Unmanned Vehicle Systems 3: 114122.
Mulero-Pázmány, M, Jenni-Eiermann, S, Strebel, N, Sattler, T, Negro, JJ, Tablado, Z (2017) Unmanned aircraft systems as a new source of disturbance for wildlife: a systematic review. PLoS ONE 12: e0178448.
Mulero-Pázmány, M, Stolper, R, Van Essen, LD, Negro, JJ, Sassen, T (2014) Remotely piloted aircraft systems as a rhinoceros anti-poaching tool in Africa. PLoS ONE 9: e83873.
Pomeroy, P, O’Connor, L, Davies, P (2015) Assessing use of and reaction to unmanned aerial systems in gray and harbor seals during breeding and molt in the UK. Journal of Unmanned Vehicle Systems 3: 102113.
Rümmler, MC, Mustafa, O, Maercker, J, Peter, HU, Esefeld, J (2016) Measuring the influence of unmanned aerial vehicles on Adélie penguins. Polar Biology 39: 13291334.
Sandbrook, C (2015) The social implications of using drones for biodiversity conservation. Ambio 44: 636647.
Sardà-Palomera, F, Bota, G, Viñolo, C, Pallarés, O, Sazatornil, V, Brotons, L, Gomáriz, S, Sardà, F (2012) Fine-scale bird monitoring from light unmanned aircraft systems. IBIS 154: 177183.
Smith, CE, Sykora-Bodie, ST, Bloodworth, B, Pack, SM, Spradlin, TR, LeBoeuf, NR (2016) Assessment of known impacts of unmanned aerial systems (UAS) on marine mammals: data gaps and recommendations for researchers in the United States. Journal of Unmanned Vehicle Systems 4: 3144.
Taylor, AR, Knight, RL (2003) Wildlife responses to recreation and associated visitor perceptions. Ecological Applications 13: 951963.
Vas, E, Lescroël, A, Duriez, O, Boguszewski, G, Grémillet, D (2015) Approaching birds with drones: first experiments and ethical guidelines. Biology Letters 11: 20140754.
Vermeulen, C, Lejeune, P, Lisein, J, Sawadogo, P, Bouché, P (2013) Unmanned aerial survey of elephants. PLoS ONE 8: e54700.
Weimerskirch, H, Prudor, A, Schull, Q (2018) Flights of drones over sub-Antarctic seabirds show species- and status-specific behavioural and physiological responses. Polar Biology 41: 259266.
Weissensteiner, MH, Poelstra, JW, Wolf, JBW (2015) Low-budget ready-to-fly unmanned aerial vehicles: an effective tool for evaluating the nesting status of canopy-breeding bird species. Journal of Avian Biology 46: 425430.

Keywords

Type Description Title
WORD
Supplementary materials

Rebolo-Ifrán et al. supplementary material
Tables S1-S3

 Word (51 KB)
51 KB

Metrics

Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed