Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T04:57:04.187Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Guidelines for people approaching breeding groups of Adélie penguins (Pygoscelis adeliae)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 October 2009

Melissa Giese
Melissa Giese
Affiliation:
Australian Antarctic Division, Channel Highway, Kingston, Tasmania 7050, Australia
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Increases in the number of people travelling to Antarctica has led to more frequent interactions between people and Antarctic wildlife, yet the effects of visitation on the animals has received limited scientific assessment. This study conducted experiments to measure the responses of incubating Adélie penguins (Pygoscelis adeliae) to controlled human approaches to determine which approach distances and approach styles caused the least disturbance to the birds. Three minimum approach distances were tested: 30, 15, and 5 m. Approaching penguins to 30 m had no measurable effect on either their behaviour or heart rate, while approaching as close as 15 m significantly elevated their heart rates above resting, undisturbed levels even though there was no behavioural indication of this response. Approaching penguins to 5 m significantly interrupted the penguins' incubation behaviour, with the potential to cause egg-cooling. Approaches to 5 m elevated heart rates above those measured when birds were undisturbed, approached to either 15 or 30 m, or exposed to ‘natural’ disturbances (that is, other penguins or south polar skuas, Catheracta maccormicki). The study also identified certain Adelie penguin behaviours that may be indicative of disturbance in response to human visitation. People visiting breeding penguins could learn to identify these behaviours, so they can monitor and modify any effects of their visit.

Type
Articles
Information
Polar Record , Volume 34 , Issue 191 , October 1998 , pp. 287 - 292
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1998

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Ainley, D.G. 1974. The comfort behaviour of Adélie penguins. Behaviour 50: 16–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burger, J. 1981. Effects of human disturbance on colonial species, particularly gulls. Colonial Waterbirds 4: 28–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Culik, B. 1994. Energy requirements of Pygoscelid penguins: a synopsis. Berichte zur Polarforschung/Reports on Polar Research 150: 1–76.Google Scholar
Culik, B., Adelung, D., and Woakes, A.J.. 1990. The effect of disturbance on the heart rate and behaviour of Adélie penguins (Pygoscelis adeliae) during the breeding season. In: Kerry, K.R., and Hempel, G. (editors). Antarctic ecosystems: ecological change and conservation. Berlin: Springer-Verlag: 177–182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Derksen, D.V. 1977. A quantitative analysis of the incubation behaviour of the Adélie penguin. The Auk 94: 552–566.Google Scholar
Enzenbacher, D.J. 1994. Antarctic tourism: an overview of 1992/93 season activity, recent developments and emerging issues. Polar Record 30 (173): 105–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Giese, M. 1996. Effects of human activity on Adélie penguin Pygoscelis adeliae breeding success. Biological Conservation 75: 157–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Giese, M., Handsworth, R., and Stephenson, R.. In press. Measuring resting heart rate in penguins using an artificial egg. Journal of Field Ornithology.Google Scholar
Naveen, R., de Roy, T., Jones, M., and Monteath, C.. 1989. Antarctic traveler's code. The Antarctic Century 4: 5–6.Google Scholar
Nimon, A.J., Schroter, R.C., and Stonehouse, B.. 1995. Heart rate of disturbed penguins. Nature 374: 415.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Noldus Information Technology. 1993. The Observer 3.0: system for collection and analysis of observational data. Wageningen: Noldus Information Technology.Google Scholar
Robert, H.C., and Ralph, C.J.. 1975. Effects of human disturbance on the breeding success of gulls. The Condor 77: 495–499.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spurr, E.B. 1975. Communication in the Adélie penguin. In: Stonehouse, B. (editor). The biology of penguins. London: Macmillan Press: 449–502.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stonehouse, B. 1992. IAATO: an association of Antarctic tour operators. Polar Record 28 (167): 322–324.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thomson, R.B. 1977. Effects of human disturbance on an Adélie penguin rookery and measures for control. In: Liano, G.A. (editor). Adaptations within Antarctic ecosystems: proceedings of the third SCAR Symposium on Antarctic Biology. Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institute: 1177–1180.Google Scholar
Wilson, K.L., Taylor, R.H., and Barton, K.J.. 1990. The impact of man on Adélie penguins at Cape Hallet, Antarctica. In: Kerry, K.R., and Hempel, G. (editors). Antarctic ecosystems: ecological change and conservation. Berlin: Springer-Verlag: 183–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilson, R.P., Coria, N.R., Spairani, H.J., and Culik, B.. 1989. Human-induced behaviour in Adélie penguins (Pygoscelis adeliae). Polar Biology 10: 77–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilson, R.P., Culik, B.M., Danefield, R., and Adelung, D.. 1991. People in Antarctica: how much do Adélie penguins care? Polar Biology 11: 363–370.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Woehler, E.J., Tierney, T.J., and Burton, H.R.. 1989. The distribution and abundance of Adélie penguins (Pygoscelis adeliae), at the Vestfold Hills, 1973. ANARE Research Notes 70: 1–41.Google Scholar
Woehler, E.J., Penney, R.L., Creet, S.M., and Burton, H.R.. 1994. Impacts of human visitors on breeding success and long-term stability in Adélie penguins at Casey, Antarctica. Polar Biology 14: 269–274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar