MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6665378

Successful use of Alarm/Alert Call Playback to end Canada Goose Problems at an Ohio Business Park (Poster)

2002· article· en· W6665378 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Philip Whitford

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAvian ecology and behavior
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGooseALARMComputer securityBusinessComputer scienceTelecommunicationsOperations managementOperations researchAeronauticsEngineeringEcologyBiology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Burgeoning continental resident Canada goose populations have led to increases in aircraft strikes. Once on or near airfields, geese have proven difficult to move and keep away. Playback of naturally recorded alarm and alert calls of the species was coupled with multiple harassment techniques to determine if this strategy would prove effective at removal of long-term resident geese from a 24-ha business park in Dayton, Ohio. The study began 26 February 2002, following territorial establishment by the geese, and continued until the last few geese had abandoned the property as of 14 May 2002. Most geese present were reusing nest territories from previous years, and thus strong nest-site fidelity made these perhaps the most difficult of all geese to remove in a nonlethal manner. Call playback used three “Goosebuster” units (Bird-X Corp. Inc., Chicago IL). Daily direct human harassment consisted of chasing geese on foot and placing objects such as owl decoys, sticks, or balloons in nests. Other harassment included sporadic use of two Chesapeake retrievers over 7 mornings, but this harassment was not considered essential to discourage return by geese. Reports of goose aggression toward and injury to employees fell from 32 and 2 cases, respectively, in 2001 to zero in 2002. Employee time spent in harassment fell from 3-4 hours/day at the start to under 15 minutes/day. Goose droppings/100 m of walks fell from a mean of 195.7 to 3.3 between 26 February and 24 March 2002, a 98% reduction (P < 0.01), and remained low thereafter. Twice daily cleaning of walks done prior to the study was deemed unnecessary by week 2 of the study, more than offsetting employee time in harassment activities. Continued alarm-call playback at random 10- to 20-minute settings appeared to help prevent return of resident geese or recolonization of the property by other geese. Goose use of the property dropped from 1600-1800 goose-hours/day before testing to fewer than 150 goose-hours/day by week 3 and to zero hours by May. Similar techniques may prove useful as nonlethal means to remove geese from areas on or near airports where they constitute a threat to air traffic.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.059

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.024
GPT teacher head0.208
Teacher spread0.184 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAvian ecology and behavior→French-language works237,207→