Polar Biology

, Volume 31, Issue 12, pp 1521–1530 | Cite as

Short-term responses of king penguins Aptenodytes patagonicus to helicopter disturbance at South Georgia

  • Kevin A. Hughes
  • Claire M. Waluda
  • Richard E. Stone
  • Martin S. Ridout
  • John R. Shears
Original Paper

Abstract

The short-term behavioural effects of helicopter overflights on breeding king penguins Aptenodytes patagonicus at South Georgia were examined. Seventeen helicopter overflights were made at altitudes between 230 and 1,768 m (750–5,800 ft) above ground level. Noise from the aircraft engines and helicopter blades increased sound levels in the colony from a background level of 65–69 dB(A) to a maximum mean peak level of 80 dB(A) during overflights. Penguin behaviour changed significantly during all overflights at all altitudes compared to the pre- and post-flight periods. Pre-overflight behaviour resumed within 15 min of the aircraft passing overhead and no chicks or eggs were observed to be taken by predators during overflights. Non-incubating birds showed an increased response with reduced overflight altitude, but this was not observed in incubating birds. Variability in overflight noise levels did not affect significantly the behaviour of incubating or non-incubating birds. Penguins exhibited a reduced response to overflights as the study progressed (despite later flights generally being flown at lower altitudes) suggesting some degree of habituation to aircraft. To minimise disturbance to king penguins we recommend a precautionary approach such that overflights are undertaken at the maximum altitude that is operationally practical, or preferably are avoided altogether.

Keywords

Aptenodytes patagonicus Behaviour Disturbance Helicopter King penguin Overflight 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank the officers and crew of HMS Endurance, S. Poncet and A. Morton for their help and assistance. The Government of South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands are acknowledged for supporting this project and granting permission for it to proceed. We are grateful to M. Lower, R. Davis, A. Bullmore and B. Dennis, Institute of Sound and Vibration Research, University of Southampton and B. Budenburg and R. Lilley (Tracksys Ltd., Nottingham, U.K.) for useful advice. We would also like to thank Dr A. Takahashi for useful discussions and comments on an earlier draft of the manuscript.

References

  1. Ainley DG (1974) The comfort behaviour of Adélie and other penguins. Behaviour 50:16–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Aitchison J (1986) The statistical analysis of compositional data. Chapman and Hall, LondonGoogle Scholar
  3. Altmann J (1974) Observational study of behaviour: sampling methods. Behaviour 49:227–267PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. ATCM (2004) Final Report of XXVII Antarctic Treaty Consultative Meeting Resolution (2): ‘Guidelines for the operation of aircraft near concentrations of birds in Antarctica’Google Scholar
  5. Born EW, Riget FF, Dietz R, Andriashek D (1999) Escape responses of hauled out ringed seals (Phoca hispida) to aircraft disturbance. Polar Biol 21:171–178CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Carlini AR, Coria NR, Santos MM, Libertelli MM, Donini G (2007) Breeding success and population trends in Adélie penguins in areas with low and high levels of human disturbance. Polar Biol 30:917–924CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Challet E, Bost CA, Handrich Y, Gendner JP, Le Maho Y (1994) Behavioural time budgets of breeding king penguins (Aptenodytes patagonicus). J Zool Lond 233:669–681CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cobley ND, Shears JR (1999) Breeding performance of gentoo penguins (Pygoscelis papua) at a colony exposed to high levels of human disturbance. Polar Biol 21:355–360CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cooper J, Avenant NL, Lafite PW (1994) Airdrops and penguins: a potential conservation problem at sub-Antarctic Marion Island. Polar Rec 30:277–282Google Scholar
  10. Côté SD (2000) Aggressiveness in king penguins in relation to reproductive status and territory location. Anim Behav 59:813–821PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Culik B, Adelung D, Woakes AJ (1990) The effect of disturbance on the heart rate and behaviour of Adélie Penguins (Pygoscelis adeliae) during the breeding season. In: Kerry KR, Hempel G (eds) Antarctic ecosystems: ecological change and conservation. Springer, Berlin, pp 177–182Google Scholar
  12. Dann P (1991) Distribution, population trends and factors influencing the population size of little penguins Eudyptula minor on Philip Island. Emu 91:263–272Google Scholar
  13. Fraser WR, Patterson DL (1997) Human disturbance and long-term changes in Adélie penguin populations: a natural experiment at Palmer Station, Antarctic Peninsula. In: Battaglia B, Valencia J, Walton DWH (eds) Antarctic Communities: species, structure and survival Proceedings of the VI SCAR Biology Symposium. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 445–452Google Scholar
  14. Giese M, Riddle M (1999) Disturbance of emperor penguin Aptenodytes forsteri chicks by helicopters. Polar Biol 22:366–371CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. GSGSSI (2004) Government of South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands: South Georgia wildlife and low flying avoidance map. British Antarctic Survey, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  16. Harris CM (2005) Aircraft operations near concentrations of birds in Antarctica: the development of practical guidelines. Biol Conserv 125:309–322CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hill D, Hockin D, Price D, Tucker G, Morris R, Treweek J (1997) Bird disturbance: improving the quality and utility of disturbance research. J Appl Ecol 34:275–288CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hockin D, Ounsted M, Gorman M, Hill D, Keller V, Baker MA (1982) Examination of the effects of disturbance on birds with reference to the role of environmental impact assessments. J Environ Manage 36:253–286Google Scholar
  19. Holmes N, Giese M, Kriwoken LK (2005) Testing the minimum approach guidelines for incubating Royal penguins Eudyptes schlegeli. Biol Conserv 126:339–350CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Jouventin P, Guillotin M, Cornet A (1979) Le chant du Manchot empereur et sa signification adaptative. Behaviour 70:231–250CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Kooyman GL, Mullins JL (1990) Ross Sea emperor penguin breeding populations estimated by aerial photography. In: Kerry KR, Hempel G (eds) Antarctic ecosystems: ecological change and conservation. Springer, Berlin, pp 169–176Google Scholar
  22. Maestripieri D, Schino G, Aureli F, Troisi A (1992) A modest proposal: displacement activities as an indicator of emotions in primates. Anim Behav 44:967–979CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Manser C (1992) Telltale signs of a stressful life. New Sci 1818:34Google Scholar
  24. Noldus LP, Trienes RJ, Hendriksen AH, Jansen H, Jansen RG (2000) The Observer Video-Pro: new software for the collection, management, and presentation of time-structured data from videotapes and digital media files. Behav Res Methods Instrum Comput 32:197–206PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Olsson O, Gabrielsen GW (1990) Effects of helicopters on a large and remote colony of Brunnich’s Guillemots (Uria lomvia) in Svalbard. Norsk Polarinstitutt Rapportserie, OsloGoogle Scholar
  26. Pasteur L, Walton DWH (2006) South Georgia: plan for progress. Managing the environment 2006–2010. British Antarctic Survey and Government of South Georgia and South Sandwich IslandsGoogle Scholar
  27. Polanen Petel TD, Terhune JM, Hindell MA, Giese MA (2006) An assessment of the audibility of sound from human transport by breeding Weddell seals (Leptonychotes weddellii). Wildl Res 33:275–291CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Regel J, Pütz K (1997) Effect of human disturbance on body temperature and energy expenditure in penguins. Polar Biol 18:246–253CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Richardson WJ, Greene CR, Malme CI, Thomson DH (1995) Marine mammals and noise. Academic Press, San DiegoGoogle Scholar
  30. Rounsevell D, Binns D (1991) Mass deaths of king penguins (Aptenodytes patagonica) at Lusitania Bay, Macquarie Island. Aurora 10:8–10Google Scholar
  31. Sladen WJL, Boyd JC, Pedersen JM (1966) Biotelemetry studies on penguin body temperatures. Antarct J US 1:142–143Google Scholar
  32. Southwell C (2005) Response behaviour of seals and penguins to helicopter surveys over the pack ice off East Antarctica. Antarct Sci 17:328–334CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Stonehouse B (1960) The king penguin Aptenodytes patagonica of South Georgia. I. Breeding behaviour and development. Falkland Isl Depend Surv Sci Rep 23Google Scholar
  34. Swithinbank C (1993) Airborne tourism in the Antarctic. Polar Rec 29:103–110CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Thomson RB (1977) Effects of human disturbance on an Adélie Penguin rookery and measures of control. In: Llano GA (ed) Adaptations within Antarctic ecosystems. Smithsonian Institute, Washington, DC, pp 1177–1180Google Scholar
  36. Wilson KJ, Taylor RH, Barton KJ (1990) The impact of man on Adélie penguins at Cape Hallett, Antarctica. In: Kerry KR, Hempel G (eds) Antarctic ecosystems: ecological change and conservation. Springer, Berlin, pp 183–190Google Scholar
  37. Wilson RP, Culik B, Danfeld R, Adelung D (1991) People in Antarctica—how much do Adélie Penguins Pygoscelis adeliae care? Polar Biol 11:363–370CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kevin A. Hughes
    • 1
  • Claire M. Waluda
    • 1
  • Richard E. Stone
    • 1
  • Martin S. Ridout
    • 2
  • John R. Shears
    • 1
  1. 1.British Antarctic SurveyNatural Environment Research CouncilCambridgeUK
  2. 2.Institute of Mathematics and StatisticsUniversity of Kent at CanterburyCanterburyUK

Personalised recommendations