Icarus and Wildlife
 |
 |
Fundamental study about Hanggliding, Paragliding and Wildlife
Icarus and Animals in the Wild
A Summary of the study into fundamentals on the theme
of Hanggliding, Paragliding and Wildlife
by
Albin Zeitler, Bertram Georgii
Linderhof, July 1994
Preamble
More leisure time and a broad spread of both old and new forms of sports have met with a sharper awareness of the environment in the last two decades.
Sport and the protection of nature are, as all social values, partly emotional and partly rational. On the emotional level this leads to a polarisation of both values. On a rational level one value does not fundamentally preclude the other.
The study was to discover what rules modern and relatively conspicuous “Nature sports” such as hanggliding and paragliding can follow in order to avoid coming in to conflict with the area of protection of nature.
The initiative of the DHV which led to this should therefore be greeted with interest from both sides.
Motives and Goals of the Study
Up until 1992, when the Wildbiologische Gesellschaft Munich e.V. (WGM)-Wildlife Biology Society of Munich began the study there had only been unsystematic isolated observations and speculation of the effect of hanggliding and paragliding on animals in the wild. The introduction of a new air law for hanggliding and paragliding led to an unsatisfactory situation; allowance of flight landing sites came under the control of the Deutschen Hängegleiterverband (DHV) – German Hanggliding Federation – which lacked information to enable helpful decisions to be made. There was therefore a need for a systematic study into this subject.
The Goals
· To obtain on a secure scientific basis the effects of hanggliders and paragliders on animals in the wild.
· To show how, on the basis of the results, animals in the wild can exist together with gliders without conflict.
· To put forward proven methods to enable the consideration of natural biological and environmental factors when making a decision to permit landing sites.
Scientific Approach
In preliminary examination for our study we had been able to observe three behaviour patterns of animals in the wild who see hanggliders and paragliders overhead:
· the animals carry on their activities and remain in their place;
· the animals move slowly to a nearby area which has better cover, from where they return to their previous position within about one hour,
· the animals flee at high speed for areas providing cover and sometimes over long distances and only return after several hours or on the following day.
We interpret these differing behaviour patterns as follows: the reaction of wild animals to hanggliders and paragliders does not, in natural conditions, follow a simple cause and effect syndrome, such as a pupil reacting to light. It points more to Habituation, that is to habits. These can effectively develop so that reaction to a cause, sight of a hangglider or paraglider-results in an orientation reaction - but no longer in dramatic behaviour such as flight or panic.
From this it is clear that the exclusive study of cause and effect cannot deliver a sufficient explanation for the differing behaviour of animals. Therefore we have taken the repetition of a cause within a certain time as a parameter, i.e. the regularity of airborne activities and the available protection – e.g. ground cover conditions, i.e. area structure.
In consequence two points were kept to the fore in the selection of the seven areas studied in Oberallgäu
· the intensity of flights, differentiating between areas which are regularly, occasionally or seldom overflown,
· the area structure, described through the features of the landscape, (little to much variation) and the vegetation (e.g. proportion of alpine meadows, small bushes or wooded areas)
The study centres on Chamois and Red Deer supplemented by single observations of Golden Eagles and Birkhuhn (Moorhens).
Results
Of 180 observations of the reaction of Chamois and Red Deer to the appearance of hanggliders and paragliders 135 (75%) fall in the behaviour pattern of remaining in the same place, 36 (20%) in the category of avoidance while 9 (5%) showed flight.
Wildlife in areas which are regularly overflown.
In flying areas which have been overflown regularly for many years and then predominantly only in areas within normal descent patterns, observations of a reaction by Chamois were of, no external recognition of hanggliders or paragliders: the animals only look about at the first appearance of the pilot. However, in 95% of cases, they remained in the area being overflown and continued to feed or to rest.
When the observations from all the study areas are brought together the majority of chamois for example react with the behaviour category Remain far fewer react by moving away and only seldom with flight.
In these areas the regular contact with flying activities over many years certainly plays a part. In addition to this a set of observations shows the influence of area and vegetation structure. The reaction, when standing on slopes which were interspersed with green bushes and rows of trees, was the same as described. Against this, the same herd of Chamois showed a clear reaction if they were in exposed positions, for example on ridges, or in open alpine meadows. They broke their current activity and began to move away. A few went into flight.
Wildlife in areas which are occasionally overflown
In the high Alps of Allgäu there is a row of mountains from which flights beyond the area of normal descent are possible. In these areas Chamois and Red Deer react in a significantly more sensitive manner than in regularly over flown mountain areas: 45% of the cases the animals moved to areas offering cover for a short time, in 5% of observations they fled into hollows or wooded places. In 50% of the occasions the animals stayed where they were when the pilot appeared.
Wildlife in areas which are seldom overflown
Eventually, in the areas where the study was carried out which are only used for cross country flights and therefore where hanggliders and paragliders only seldom appeared, Chamois took flight in 80% of the observations, in 12% they moved off to other areas and in only 8% they remained where thy were. Red Deer were even more sensitive, reacting in flight in 98% of their contacts with hanggliders or paragliders.
With Red Deer clear differences showed between the sexes: large herds of more than fifteen males did not flee on slow and brisk, into covered areas (lightly wooded or rows of trees) and then soon returned to open areas. On the other hand, in mixed herds or herds with a majority of females or calves, the larger part of the herd took flight into deeply wooded areas. This was not just in open areas but also when gliders appeared over areas thick with dwarf mountain pines.
These were often very lasting disturbances: they lasted for at least three hours, often until the following morning. These kind of long absences of animals could not be observed on days when there was no flight activity. In another area some animals stayed for days on end, they were then only seen in the grazing areas late in the evening or early in the morning. Then they gradually began to come out again in the daylight.
Chamois showed yet another behaviour: when gliders reappeared within a few days their reaction reduced. The animals did not shift a great distance, but instead moved into areas with better cover. As a rule they returned in between one or two hours. When the pilots only reappeared every fourteen days this always resulted in flight. Return to the previously used area followed after several hours.
Frequency of Flights
Too much emphasis should not be placed on the results from the seldom overflown areas. Cross country flights in remote areas demand not only good area knowledge and flying abilities but also such good weather and wind conditions that they are only possible on very few days of the year. In some of our study areas we often waited many days for a pilot to fly over.
For the frequency of activities in the three area categories it means that: some 75% of flying activities take place within well defined area or time boundaries in routes taken in normal descent. Some 20% are slightly beyond the area of normal descent. Only every twentieth flight takes a cross country route and than with a clear majority between May and August and mainly in the afternoon.
Height and Duration of over flight.
In areas which are regularly flown during normal descent the critical height for over flying Chamois and Red Deer is 100 meters and seldom less than 50 meters. Decisive for so much tolerance from the animals, as well as the availability of cover which the animals can run to, is that the pilot flies over quickly. In the other two categories of flying area heights of over 10 meter gave no problems. That holds in particular for areas, in which the open or lightly wooded parts are regularly crossed by animals.
At low overflying heights over areas where animals regularly stay, long residence times are also a problem. We could see that again, for example, after valley crossings by a Hangglider or Paraglider when the pilot tries to gain height by circling or criss crossing over an area. Under such circumstances chamois and red deer flee, after a short period, to an area offering good cover, for example woods or wooded hollows.
Flying activities, hikers and hunting
In some of our study areas in which there were hikers as well as hanggliders and paragliders we made the following revealing observations:
Chamois avoid areas with hiking trails regardless of whether these are overfown or not. Moreover it was seen that hikers appear as a rule about two hours earlier than hanggliders and paraglider pilots. In some cases this results in chamois and red deer moving to less frequented areas long before the first pilot has started.
In areas with very many trails (more than 3 km per 100 Ha (Ha = 10.000 sq.m.)) animals in the wild can only partly move away from hiking activities. What was striking was that in such areas chamois only reacted in a sensitive way to hanggliders or paragliders on days when many hikers were about.
Our previous assumption, that high hunting pressure that made chamois and red deer particularly timid could lead to a sensitive reaction to hanggliders and paragliders, was not proven. What was seen was, that in order to have protective cover from woods in places hunted to maintain adequate tree protection for special areas, that the animals almost always moved away when hikers appeared. But not when hanggliders or paragliders appeared. Also, hunting activities are significantly less disturbed by flying activities as by hiking.
Birds and Flying Acitvities
During summer and autumn Golden Eagles use, as experienced thermal sailors, the same upcurrent areas as pilots without showing recognisable “hostility”. Problems can occur close to rock walls in which they have their eyries, mostly at heights between 1200 and 1600 meters, sometimes in lower nesting walls. Some observations have shown that Golden Eagles, during their brooding periods, clearly react protectively on the approach of hanggliders and paragliders. An unmistakable sign of this is area marking wave formed landing flights.
A great deal more difficult are observations of predominantly ground living Rauhfusshühner such as – Auerschneehuhn (capercaillie), Haselschneehuhn (hazelhen), Birkschneehuhn (moorhen), and Alpenschneehuhn. Most occur regularly in our flying areas. The comparison with long established data for the occurrence of animals in Oberallgäu shows that their directly in the area of a normal descent route. In another the same applies for moorhens and capercaillie.
We could only follow the direct reaction of these species on a few occasions, particularly as their activities rarely coincid with flying times of pilots. In as far as such observations were possible moorhens did not flee.
Hanggliders = Giant Birds
The critics of these sports would like to apply to hanggliding and paragliding the “fear of birds of prey” in animals in the wild which is created in experiments with artificial Griffins to control animals. In reality the relationship is not so simple as in these trials. Our observations show a comparison with new results in behavioural science: the recognition of enemies – are they natural or artificial (dummies, gliders) – cannot be reduced to simply the shape or size of the object. The mere appearance of hanggliders or paragliders is therefore far from being an hostile experience.
Evaluation
In order to evaluate the compatibility of a sport with nature there are clear principles: the usage of their living areas should not be further restricted in area or time. In the case of hanggliders and paragliders this results in the following balance of our survey:
· provided that the present intensity and requirements of these sports does not increase there will be only local and occasional conflict with animals in the wild.
· In areas which are regularly overflown the animals remain largely unaffected. After the two years of the study there is no indication of harm to the animals of the wild.
· The opening up of undisturbed areas through cross country flights has received critical attention. However a further reduction in these problems is expected with the new air laws with a licence requirement for take-off and landing sites.
Recommendations
Sensible rules to solve the conflict between flying activities and animals in the wild must be settled for each particular flying area. Here we only recommend three basic ground rules:
· In areas of intensive flying and hiking activity the two are so coordinated that they do not increase their effect on animals in the wild.
· Over sensitive breeding grounds flying activities should be controlled in such a way that disturbance is avoided.
· With this aim the problem areas should be presented on the basics of the local knowledge from hunters and nature conservationists of the year round activities of species and the knowledge of conflict areas from pilots.
