Thursday 15 February 2018

The Conversation/Hodgson & Koh: Epic Duck Challenge’ shows drones can outdo people at surveying wildlife

The Conversation   

Edition:

Available editions
Africa

    Job Board

    Become an author
    Sign up as a reader
    Sign in

The Conversation
Academic rigour, journalistic flair

    Arts + Culture
    Business + Economy
    Education
    Environment + Energy
    Health + Medicine
    Politics + Society
    Science + Technology
    In French

‘Epic Duck Challenge’ shows drones can outdo people at surveying wildlife
February 13, 2018 3.11pm SAST
A drone image of a breeding colony of Greater Crested Terns. Researchers used plastic bird decoys to replicate this species in an experiment that compared different ways of counting wildlife. Jarrod Hodgson, CC BY-ND
Authors

    Jarrod Hodgson

    PhD Candidate, University of Adelaide
    Aleks Terauds

    Senior Research Scientist / Section Head, Australian Antarctic Division
    Lian Pin Koh

    Professor, University of Adelaide

Disclosure statement

Jarrod Hodgson is supported by an Australian Government Research Training Program Scholarship.

Aleks Terauds receives funding from the Australian Antarctic Program

Lian Pin Koh receives funding from Australian Research Council.
Partners

University of Adelaide

University of Adelaide provides funding as a member of The Conversation AU.

The Conversation is funded by Barclays Africa and seven universities, including the Cape Peninsula University of Technology, Rhodes University and the Universities of Cape Town, Johannesburg, Kwa-Zulu Natal, Pretoria, and South Africa. It is hosted by the Universities of the Witwatersrand and Western Cape, the African Population and Health Research Centre and the Nigerian Academy of Science. The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation is a Strategic Partner. more
Republish this article

Republish
Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under Creative Commons licence.

    Email
    Twitter23
    Facebook310
    LinkedIn9
    Print

Ecologists are increasingly using drones to gather data. Scientists have used remotely piloted aircraft to estimate the health of fragile polar mosses, to measure and predict the mass of leopard seals, and even to collect whale snot. Drones have also been labelled as game-changers for wildlife population monitoring.

But once the take-off dust settles, how do we know if drones produce accurate data? Perhaps even more importantly, how do the data compare to those gathered using a traditional ground-based approach?

To answer these questions we created the #EpicDuckChallenge, which involved deploying thousands of plastic replica ducks on an Adelaide beach, and then testing various methods of tallying them up.

As we report today in the journal Methods in Ecology and Evolution, drones do indeed generate accurate wildlife population data – even more accurate, in fact, than those collected the old-fashioned way.
Jarrod Hodgson standing in one of the replica colonies of seabirds constructed for the #EpicDuckChallenge. S. Andriolo

Assessing the accuracy of wildlife count data is hard. We can’t be sure of the true number of animals present in a group of wild animals. So, to overcome this uncertainty, we created life-sized, replica seabird colonies, each with a known number of individuals.

From the optimum vantage and in ideal weather conditions, experienced wildlife spotters independently counted the colonies from the ground using binoculars and telescopes. At the same time, a drone captured photographs of each colony from a range of heights. Citizen scientists then used these images to tally the number of animals they could see.

Counts of birds in drone-derived imagery were better than those made by wildlife observers on the ground. The drone approach was more precise and more accurate – it produced counts that were consistently closer to the true number of individuals.
Comparing the vantages: drone-derived photographs and the ground counter’s view. J. Hodgson

The difference between the results was not trivial. Drone-derived data were between 43% and 96% more accurate than ground counts. The variation was due to how many pixels represented each bird, which in turn is related to the height that the drone was flown and the resolution of the camera.

This wasn’t a surprise. The experienced ground counters did well, but the drone’s vantage point was superior. Observing photos taken from above meant the citizen scientists did not have to contend with obscured birds that often occur during ground counts. The imagery also benefited the citizen scientists as they could digitally review their counts as many times as they needed. This reduced the likelihood of both missing an individual and counting an individual more than once.
The scientists were assisted by many volunteers, without whom the #EpicDuckChallenge would not have been possible. J. Hodgson

However, even though it proved to be more accurate, making manual digital counts is still tedious and time-consuming. To address this, we developed a computer algorithm in the hope that it could further improve efficiency without diminishing data quality. And it did.

We delineated a proportion of birds in each colony to train the algorithm to recognise how the animal of interest appeared in the imagery. We found that using 10% training data was sufficient to produce a colony count that was comparable to that of a human reviewing the entire scene.

This computerisation can reduce the time needed to process data, providing the opportunity to cut the costs and resources needed to survey wildlife populations. When combined with the efficiencies drones provide for surveying sites that are hard to access on foot, these savings may be considerable.
Using drone monitoring in the field

Our results have important implications for a range of species. We think they are especially relevant to aggregating birds, including seabirds like albatrosses, surface nesting penguins and frigatebirds, as well as colonial nesting waterbirds like pelicans.

Other types of animals that are easily seen from above, including hauled-out seals and dugongs, are highly suited to drone monitoring. The nests or tracks of animals, such as orangutans and turtles, can also be used to infer presence.

Additional experiments will be useful to assess the ability of drones to survey animals that prefer to stay hidden and those within complex habitats. Such assessments are of interest to us, and researchers around the globe, with current investigations focused on wildlife such as arboreal mammals and cetaceans.

We are still learning about how wildlife react to the presence of drones, and more research is required to quantify these responses in a range of species and environments. The results will help to refine and improve drone monitoring protocols so that drones have minimal impact on wildlife. This is particularly important for species that are prone to disturbance, and where close proximity is not possible or desirable.

Read more: How drones can help fight the war on shark attacks

The world is rapidly changing, with many negative outcomes for wildlife. Technology like drones can help scientists and managers gather data fast enough to enable timely assessment of the implications of these changes.

When monitoring wildlife, increasing the accuracy and precision of animal surveys gives us more confidence in our population estimates. This provides a stronger evidence base on which to make management decisions or policy changes. For species and ecosystems threatened with extinction or irreparable damage, such speedy action could be a literal lifeline.

    Conservation
    Birds
    Seabirds
    Drones
    Global Perspectives

    Tweet
    Share
    Get newsletter

You might also like
Prehistoric wine discovered in inaccessible caves forces a rethink of ancient Sicilian culture
NGOs need to step up and keep children safe – here’s what they can do
Bollywood epic Padmavaat has emerged out of the mists of legend to divide Indian society
With a busy election schedule, Africa needs a reversal of the old order
Sign in to comment
4 Comments
Oldest Newest

    Andy King

    Kudos to the research team. Quantifying the improvement in accuracy of a data collection method validates its adoption. Nice to see evidence being used. Great work.
    2 days ago
    Report
    David Thompson

    Science Communications at Hawkesbury Institute for the Environment, Western Sydney University

    Do you think that for the real birds this is rather like going to Madame Tussauds? “Good likeness, close but not quite…”
    a day ago
    Report

Show all comments
Most popular on The Conversation

    South Africa’s future hinges on Ramaphosa’s strategic skills
    ANC power struggle shows that South Africa is not exceptional (after all)
    Zuma’s reluctance to leave office is offering sound lessons in democracy
    A personal journey sheds light on why there are so few black women in science
    Africa needs to invest more in its water professionals

    Desalination: global examples show how Cape Town could up its game
    How the continent’s languages can unlock the potential of young Africans
    Why poor parents in Nairobi choose private over free primary schools
    Explainer: how Facebook has become the world’s largest echo chamber
    What southern Africa can learn from other countries about adapting to drought

Expert Database

    Find experts with knowledge in:*

Want to write?

Write an article and join a growing community of more than 62,700 academics and researchers from 2,278 institutions.

Register now
The Conversation
Community

    Community standards
    Republishing guidelines
    Research and Expert Database
    Analytics
    Job Board
    Our feeds

Company

    Who we are
    Our charter
    Our team
    Partners and funders
    Contributing institutions
    Resource for media
    Contact us

Stay informed and subscribe to our free daily newsletter and get the latest analysis and commentary directly in your inbox.
Email address
Follow us on social media

Privacy policy Terms and conditions Corrections

Copyright © 2010–2018, The Conversation Africa, Inc.

No comments: