Mitigation techniques to reduce avian electrocution rates

ABSTRACT From August 2013, we undertook a 1‐year trial of mitigation techniques at an electricity power line in the Mongolian steppe with a high avian electrocution rate. We examined 2 mitigation methods at phase‐1 conductors on the top of power poles (i.e., reconfiguration of the insulator mount an...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Andrew Dixon, MD Lutfor Rahman, Batbayar Galtbalt, Batbayar Bold, Batmunkh Davaasuren, Nyambayar Batbayar, Batkhuu Sugarsaikhan
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Wiley 2019-09-01
Series:Wildlife Society Bulletin
Subjects:
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1002/wsb.990
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1850116444003500032
author Andrew Dixon
MD Lutfor Rahman
Batbayar Galtbalt
Batbayar Bold
Batmunkh Davaasuren
Nyambayar Batbayar
Batkhuu Sugarsaikhan
author_facet Andrew Dixon
MD Lutfor Rahman
Batbayar Galtbalt
Batbayar Bold
Batmunkh Davaasuren
Nyambayar Batbayar
Batkhuu Sugarsaikhan
author_sort Andrew Dixon
collection DOAJ
description ABSTRACT From August 2013, we undertook a 1‐year trial of mitigation techniques at an electricity power line in the Mongolian steppe with a high avian electrocution rate. We examined 2 mitigation methods at phase‐1 conductors on the top of power poles (i.e., reconfiguration of the insulator mount and insulation covers on the conductor wire) and 3 mitigation methods at phase‐2 and 3 conductors on pole cross‐arms (i.e., perch deflector brushes, rotating‐mirror perch deterrents, and insulation covers on the conductor wires). The perch management techniques selected for the trial are currently widely adopted by power line managers in Mongolia. In comparison with the control, with no mitigation, electrocution rates were reduced both by the reconfiguration of insulator mounts and insulation of conductor wires at phase‐1, though the reduction was greater for the former—73% mean reduction for reconfigured mounts and 59% for insulation covers. Electrocution rates were reduced by the placement of rotating‐mirrors and insulation of conductor wires at phases 2 and 3, with the reduction being greater for the former—91% mean reduction for mirrors and 66% for insulation covers. Deployment of metal perch deflector brushes at phases 2 and 3 had no effect on electrocution rates and should not be used as mitigation. Most electrocutions occurred at phase 1 on the top of the pole, indicating that mitigation should be prioritized at this phase. In terms of cost and efficacy, reconfigured mounts represented the best option as a permanent fix at phase 1. At phases on cross‐arms, the relative merits of mirrors and insulation covers need to be assessed over a longer period, and these temporary mitigation measures should be compared with alternative permanent fixes. © 2019 The Wildlife Society.
format Article
id doaj-art-2d2a4bd2089f4661a6bca2cdb21d0c35
institution OA Journals
issn 2328-5540
language English
publishDate 2019-09-01
publisher Wiley
record_format Article
series Wildlife Society Bulletin
spelling doaj-art-2d2a4bd2089f4661a6bca2cdb21d0c352025-08-20T02:36:19ZengWileyWildlife Society Bulletin2328-55402019-09-0143347648310.1002/wsb.990Mitigation techniques to reduce avian electrocution ratesAndrew Dixon0MD Lutfor Rahman1Batbayar Galtbalt2Batbayar Bold3Batmunkh Davaasuren4Nyambayar Batbayar5Batkhuu Sugarsaikhan6Emirates Falconers' Club P.O. Box 47716, Al Mamoura Building (A), Muroor Road Abu Dhabi United Arab EmiratesInternational Wildlife Consultants Ltd. P.O. Box 19, Carmarthen, SA33 5YL, United Kingdom; Environment-Agency Abu Dhabi, P.O. Box 45553, Al Mamoura Building (A), Muroor Road Abu Dhabi United Arab EmiratesWildlife Science and Conservation Center B‐802 Union Building, Sukhbaatar District Ulaanbaatar 14210 MongoliaWildlife Science and Conservation Center B‐802 Union Building, Sukhbaatar District Ulaanbaatar 14210 MongoliaWildlife Science and Conservation Center B‐802 Union Building, Sukhbaatar District Ulaanbaatar 14210 MongoliaWildlife Science and Conservation Center B‐802 Union Building, Sukhbaatar District Ulaanbaatar 14210 MongoliaEastern Energy Company Baruun‐Urt Sukhbaatar MongoliaABSTRACT From August 2013, we undertook a 1‐year trial of mitigation techniques at an electricity power line in the Mongolian steppe with a high avian electrocution rate. We examined 2 mitigation methods at phase‐1 conductors on the top of power poles (i.e., reconfiguration of the insulator mount and insulation covers on the conductor wire) and 3 mitigation methods at phase‐2 and 3 conductors on pole cross‐arms (i.e., perch deflector brushes, rotating‐mirror perch deterrents, and insulation covers on the conductor wires). The perch management techniques selected for the trial are currently widely adopted by power line managers in Mongolia. In comparison with the control, with no mitigation, electrocution rates were reduced both by the reconfiguration of insulator mounts and insulation of conductor wires at phase‐1, though the reduction was greater for the former—73% mean reduction for reconfigured mounts and 59% for insulation covers. Electrocution rates were reduced by the placement of rotating‐mirrors and insulation of conductor wires at phases 2 and 3, with the reduction being greater for the former—91% mean reduction for mirrors and 66% for insulation covers. Deployment of metal perch deflector brushes at phases 2 and 3 had no effect on electrocution rates and should not be used as mitigation. Most electrocutions occurred at phase 1 on the top of the pole, indicating that mitigation should be prioritized at this phase. In terms of cost and efficacy, reconfigured mounts represented the best option as a permanent fix at phase 1. At phases on cross‐arms, the relative merits of mirrors and insulation covers need to be assessed over a longer period, and these temporary mitigation measures should be compared with alternative permanent fixes. © 2019 The Wildlife Society.https://doi.org/10.1002/wsb.990avian electrocutionbird of preydeterrentinsulationmitigationMongolia
spellingShingle Andrew Dixon
MD Lutfor Rahman
Batbayar Galtbalt
Batbayar Bold
Batmunkh Davaasuren
Nyambayar Batbayar
Batkhuu Sugarsaikhan
Mitigation techniques to reduce avian electrocution rates
Wildlife Society Bulletin
avian electrocution
bird of prey
deterrent
insulation
mitigation
Mongolia
title Mitigation techniques to reduce avian electrocution rates
title_full Mitigation techniques to reduce avian electrocution rates
title_fullStr Mitigation techniques to reduce avian electrocution rates
title_full_unstemmed Mitigation techniques to reduce avian electrocution rates
title_short Mitigation techniques to reduce avian electrocution rates
title_sort mitigation techniques to reduce avian electrocution rates
topic avian electrocution
bird of prey
deterrent
insulation
mitigation
Mongolia
url https://doi.org/10.1002/wsb.990
work_keys_str_mv AT andrewdixon mitigationtechniquestoreduceavianelectrocutionrates
AT mdlutforrahman mitigationtechniquestoreduceavianelectrocutionrates
AT batbayargaltbalt mitigationtechniquestoreduceavianelectrocutionrates
AT batbayarbold mitigationtechniquestoreduceavianelectrocutionrates
AT batmunkhdavaasuren mitigationtechniquestoreduceavianelectrocutionrates
AT nyambayarbatbayar mitigationtechniquestoreduceavianelectrocutionrates
AT batkhuusugarsaikhan mitigationtechniquestoreduceavianelectrocutionrates