A comparison of unmanned aerial vehicles (drones) and manned helicopters for monitoring macropod populations
Matthew Gentle
A D , Neal Finch B , James Speed A and Anthony Pople C
A Invasive Plants and Animals, Biosecurity Queensland, Department of Agriculture and Fisheries, 203 Tor St, Toowoomba, Qld 4350, Australia.
B Macropod Management Unit, Environmental Services and Regulation, Environment and Science, 146 Herries St, Toowoomba, Qld 4350, Australia.
C Invasive Plants and Animals, Biosecurity Queensland, Department of Agriculture and Fisheries, 41 Boggo Road, Dutton Park, Qld 4102, Australia.
D Corresponding author. Email: matthew.gentle@daf.qld.gov.au
Wildlife Research 45(7) 586-594 https://doi.org/10.1071/WR18034
Submitted: 20 February 2018 Accepted: 15 August 2018 Published: 7 November 2018
Abstract
Context: Developments in the use of remote aircraft, or unmanned aerial systems (UAS), for ecological study have been rapid. Helicopter surveys have proven to be a reliable, repeatable method for broad-scale monitoring of harvested kangaroo populations in Australia’s rangelands, but the recent availability of long-range UAS may offer improvements in detectability and cost efficiency.
Aims: We aimed to test the ability of a long-range UAS (Spylite, Bluebird Aero Systems Ltd, Kadima, Israel) to survey macropod populations at a landscape scale, and validate the results against those from the current best-practice helicopter surveys.
Methods: Four 80-km transects in south-western Queensland were surveyed using a helicopter and UAS. Two observers, occupying the rear seats of the helicopter, recorded animals observed in distance classes perpendicular to either side of the aircraft. Continuous electro-optical (EO) or infrared (IR) video from the UAS were recorded for later processing. Animal densities were calculated using line-transect methods for both techniques. The efficiency and cost effectiveness of each survey technique were also assessed using the flight and data processing times.
Key results: The encounter rate for macropods during the UAS was significantly lower compared with the helicopter survey, resulting in low estimates of macropod density (3.2 versus 53.8 animals km–2 respectively). The UAS technique recorded between 2.9 and 12.7% of the macropod density observed on each transect during the helicopter survey. The helicopter surveys were less expensive and more efficient and cost effective, requiring less flight and data processing time than the UAS surveys.
Conclusions: Utilising long-range UAS to detect and count groups of wild animals for landscape-scale wildlife monitoring has potential, but improvements in detection and identification technology are needed to match or exceed the accuracy of the conventional aerial survey technique for kangaroos.
Implications: Recent advances in camera technology and methodological refinements are encouraging for aerial survey of wildlife using UAS. However, significant improvements are required to survey for kangaroos and new technology should again be tested against current benchmarks.
Additional keywords: wildlife survey, density, unmanned aerial system (UAS).
References
Braithwaite, L. W., Maher, M., Briggs, S. V., and Parker, B. S. (1986). An aerial survey of three game species of waterfowl (family Anatidae) populations in eastern Australia. Australian Wildlife Research 13, 213–223.| An aerial survey of three game species of waterfowl (family Anatidae) populations in eastern Australia.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Buckland, S. T., Anderson, D. R., Burnham, K. P., and Laake, J. L. (1993). ‘Distance Sampling: Estimating Abundance of Biological Populations.’ (Springer: London.)
Chrétien, L. P., Théau, J., and Ménard, P. (2016). Visible and thermal infrared remote sensing for the detection of white-tailed deer using an unmanned aerial system. Wildlife Society Bulletin 40, 181–191.
| Visible and thermal infrared remote sensing for the detection of white-tailed deer using an unmanned aerial system.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Christie, K. S., Gilbert, S. L., Brown, C. L., Hatfield, M., and Hanson, L. (2016). Unmanned aircraft systems in wildlife research: current and future applications of a transformative technology. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 14, 241–251.
| Unmanned aircraft systems in wildlife research: current and future applications of a transformative technology.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Clancy, T. F., Pople, A. R., and Gibson, L. A. (1997). Comparison of helicopter line transects with walked line transects for estimating densities of kangaroos. Wildlife Research 24, 397–409.
| Comparison of helicopter line transects with walked line transects for estimating densities of kangaroos.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
DEHP (2015). 2016 quota submissions for commerically harvested macropods in Queensland. Macropod Management Program, Southern Region, Environmental Services and Regulation, Department of Environment and Heritage Protection, Queensland.
Dulava, S., Bean, W. T., and Richmond, O. M. W. (2015). Environmental reviews and case studies: applications of Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) for waterbird surveys. Environmental Practice 17, 201–210.
| Environmental reviews and case studies: applications of Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) for waterbird surveys.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Engeman, R. M., Massei, G., Sage, M., and Gentle, M. N. (2013). Monitoring wild pig populations: a review of methods. Environmental Science and Pollution Research International 20, 8077–8091.
| Monitoring wild pig populations: a review of methods.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Ezat, M. A., Fritsch, C. J., and Downs, C. T. (2018). Use of an unmanned aerial vehicle (drone) to survey Nile crocodile populations: a case study at Lake Nyamithi, Ndumo game reserve, South Africa. Biological Conservation 223, 76–81.
| Use of an unmanned aerial vehicle (drone) to survey Nile crocodile populations: a case study at Lake Nyamithi, Ndumo game reserve, South Africa.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Fewster, R. M., Southwell, C., Borchers, D. L., Buckland, S. T., and Pople, A. R. (2008). The influence of animal mobility on the assumption of uniform distances in aerial line-transect surveys. Wildlife Research 35, 275–288.
| The influence of animal mobility on the assumption of uniform distances in aerial line-transect surveys.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Gentle, M., and Pople, A. (2013). Effectiveness of commercial harvesting in controlling feral-pig populations. Wildlife Research 40, 459–469.
| Effectiveness of commercial harvesting in controlling feral-pig populations.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Grenzdörffer, G. J. (2013). UAS-based automatic bird count of a common gull colony. In ‘International Archives of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences – ISPRS Archives’. (Eds G. Grenzdörffer and R. Bill.) pp. 169–174. Available at https://www.int-arch-photogramm-remote-sens-spatial-inf-sci.net/XL-1-W2/169/2013/isprsarchives-XL-1-W2-169-2013.pdf [accessed 25 October 2018]
Jones IV, G. P., Pearlstine, L. G., and Percival, H. F. (2006). An assessment of small unmanned aerial vehicles for wildlife research. Wildlife Society Bulletin 34, 750–758.
| An assessment of small unmanned aerial vehicles for wildlife research.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Linchant, J., Lisein, J., Semeki, J., Lejeune, P., and Vermeulen, C. (2015). Are unmanned aircraft systems (UASs) the future of wildlife monitoring? A review of accomplishments and challenges. Mammal Review 45, 239–252.
| Are unmanned aircraft systems (UASs) the future of wildlife monitoring? A review of accomplishments and challenges.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Longmore, S. N., Collins, R. P., Pfeifer, S., Fox, S. E., Mulero-Pázmány, M., Bezombes, F., Goodwin, A., De Juan Ovelar, M., Knapen, J. H., and Wich, S. A. (2017). Adapting astronomical source detection software to help detect animals in thermal images obtained by unmanned aerial systems. International Journal of Remote Sensing 38, 2623–2638.
| Adapting astronomical source detection software to help detect animals in thermal images obtained by unmanned aerial systems.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Maes, W. H., Huete, A. R., and Steppe, K. (2017). Optimizing the processing of UAV-based thermal imagery. Remote Sensing 9, 476.
| Optimizing the processing of UAV-based thermal imagery.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
McEvoy, J. F., Hall, G. P., and McDonald, P. G. (2016). Evaluation of unmanned aerial vehicle shape, flight path and camera type for waterfowl surveys: disturbance effects and species recognition. PeerJ 4, e1831.
Morley, C. G., Broadley, J., Hartley, R., Herries, D., McMorran, D., and McLean, I. G. (2017). The potential of using Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAV) for precision pest control of possums (Trichosurus vulpeca). Rethinking Ecology 2, 27–39.
| The potential of using Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAV) for precision pest control of possums (Trichosurus vulpeca).Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Norouzzadeh M. S. Nguyen A. Kosmala M. Swanson A. Packer C. Clune J. 2017
Pomeroy, P, O’Connor, L, and Davies, P (2015). Assessing use of and reaction to unmanned aerial systems in gray and harbour seals during breeding and molt in the UK. Journal of Unmanned Vehicle Systems 3, 102–113.
Pople, A. R. (1999). Repeatability of aerial surveys. Australian Zoologist 31, 280–286.
| Repeatability of aerial surveys.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Pople, A. (2004). Population monitoring for kangaroo management. Australian Mammalogy 26, 37–44.
| Population monitoring for kangaroo management.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Pople, A. R. (2008). Frequency and precision of aerial surveys for kangaroo management. Wildlife Research 35, 340–348.
| Frequency and precision of aerial surveys for kangaroo management.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Pople, A. R., Cairns, S. C., Clancy, T. F., Grigg, G. C., Beard, L. A., and Southwell, C. J. (1998). Comparison of surveys of kangaroos in Queensland using helicopters and fixed-wing aircraft. The Rangeland Journal 20, 92–103.
| Comparison of surveys of kangaroos in Queensland using helicopters and fixed-wing aircraft.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
R Core Team (2017). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. 3.3.3 edn. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria.
Southwell, C. (1994). Evaluation of walked line transect counts for estimating macropod density. The Journal of Wildlife Management 58, 348–356.
| Evaluation of walked line transect counts for estimating macropod density.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Thomas, L., Buckland, S. T., Rexstad, E. A., Laake, J. L., Strindberg, S., Hedley, S. L., Bishop, J. R. B., Marques, T. A., and Burnham, K. P. (2010). Distance software: design and analysis of distance sampling surveys for estimating population size. Journal of Applied Ecology 47, 5–14.
| Distance software: design and analysis of distance sampling surveys for estimating population size.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Vermeulen, C., Lejeune, P., Lisein, J., Sawadogo, P., and Bouche, P. (2013). Unmanned aerial survey of elephants. PLoS One 8, e54700.
| Unmanned aerial survey of elephants.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
