Unmanned aerial vehicles for surveying marine fauna: assessing detection probability.

Aerial surveys are conducted for various fauna to assess abundance, distribution, and habitat use over large spatial scales. They are traditionally conducted using light aircraft with observers recording sightings in real time. Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) offer an alternative with many potential advantages, including eliminating human risk. To be effective, this emerging platform needs to provide detection rates of animals comparable to traditional methods. UAVs can also acquire new types of information, and this new data requires a reevaluation of traditional analyses used in aerial surveys; including estimating the probability of detecting animals. We conducted 17 replicate UAV surveys of humpback whales (Megaptera novaeangliae) while simultaneously obtaining a 'census' of the population from land-based observations, to assess UAV detection probability. The ScanEagle UAV, carrying a digital SLR camera, continuously captured images (with 75% overlap) along transects covering the visual range of land-based observers. We also used ScanEagle to conduct focal follows of whale pods (n = 12, mean duration = 40 min), to assess a new method of estimating availability. A comparison of the whale detections from the UAV to the land-based census provided an estimated UAV detection probability of 0.33 (CV = 0.25; incorporating both availability and perception biases), which was not affected by environmental covariates (Beaufort sea state, glare, and cloud cover). According to our focal follows, the mean availability was 0.63 (CV = 0.37), with pods including mother/calf pairs having a higher availability (0.86, CV = 0.20) than those without (0.59, CV = 0.38). The follows also revealed (and provided a potential correction for) a downward bias in group size estimates from the UAV surveys, which resulted from asynchronous diving within whale pods, and a relatively short observation window of 9 s. We have shown that UAVs are an effective alternative to traditional methods, providing a detection probability that is within the range of previous studies for our target species. We also describe a method of assessing availability bias that represents spatial and temporal characteristics of a survey, from the same perspective as the survey platform, is benign, and provides additional data on animal behavior.

[1]  Christian Léger,et al.  Bootstrap confidence intervals for ratios of expectations , 1999, TOMC.

[2]  Frédéric Maire,et al.  A Convolutional Neural Network for Automatic Analysis of Aerial Imagery , 2014, 2014 International Conference on Digital Image Computing: Techniques and Applications (DICTA).

[3]  L. Herman,et al.  Changes over a ten-year interval in the distribution and relative abundance of humpback whales (Megaptera novaeangliae) wintering in Hawaiian waters , 1999 .

[4]  S. Buckland Introduction to distance sampling : estimating abundance of biological populations , 2001 .

[5]  David L. Borchers,et al.  Estimating Distance Sampling Detection Functions When Distances Are Measured With Errors , 2010 .

[6]  K. Pollock,et al.  Estimating Animal Abundance in Heterogeneous Environments: An Application to Aerial Surveys for Dugongs , 2006 .

[7]  S. T. Buckland,et al.  Estimating Animal Abundance , 2002 .

[8]  Frédéric Maire,et al.  Automating Marine Mammal Detection in Aerial Images Captured During Wildlife Surveys: A Deep Learning Approach , 2015, Australasian Conference on Artificial Intelligence.

[9]  Jarrod C Hodgson,et al.  Precision wildlife monitoring using unmanned aerial vehicles , 2016, Scientific Reports.

[10]  H. Marsh,et al.  Correcting for visibility bias in strip transect aerial surveys of aquatic fauna , 1989 .

[11]  John Calambokidis,et al.  Probability of Detecting Harbor Porpoise from Aerial Surveys: Estimating g(0) , 1997 .

[12]  D. Bird,et al.  Population Census of a Large Common Tern Colony with a Small Unmanned Aircraft , 2015, PloS one.

[13]  M. Engel,et al.  Humpback whales within the Brazilian breeding ground: distribution and population size estimate , 2010 .

[14]  R Core Team,et al.  R: A language and environment for statistical computing. , 2014 .

[15]  Trent L. McDonald,et al.  Evaluation of an Unmanned Airborne System for Monitoring Marine Mammals , 2009 .

[16]  Abundance estimates of Breeding Stock ‘D’ Humpback Whales from aerial and land-based surveys off Shark Bay, Western Australia, 2008 , 2011 .

[17]  A. Hodgson,et al.  Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) for Surveying Marine Fauna: A Dugong Case Study , 2013, PloS one.

[18]  J. Teilmann,et al.  Rate of increase and current abundance of humpback whales in West Greenland , 2023, J. Cetacean Res. Manage..

[19]  Julie Linchant,et al.  Are unmanned aircraft systems (UASs) the future of wildlife monitoring? A review of accomplishments and challenges , 2015 .

[20]  A. Andriolo,et al.  The first aerial survey to estimate abundance of humpback whales (Megaptera novaeangliae) in the breeding ground off Brazil (Breeding Stock A) , 2023, J. Cetacean Res. Manage..

[21]  S. T. Buckland,et al.  The Effect of Animal Movement on Line Transect Estimates of Abundance , 2015, PloS one.

[22]  D. Bates,et al.  Fitting Linear Mixed-Effects Models Using lme4 , 2014, 1406.5823.

[23]  David L. Borchers,et al.  Estimating Animal Abundance: Closed Populations , 2010 .

[24]  P. Boveng,et al.  Evaluation of a ship-based unoccupied aircraft system (UAS) for surveys of spotted and ribbon seals in the Bering Sea pack ice1 , 2015 .

[25]  Philippe Bouché,et al.  Unmanned Aerial Survey of Elephants , 2013, PloS one.

[26]  David R. Anderson,et al.  Advanced distance sampling , 2004 .

[27]  D. Paton,et al.  Absolute and relative abundance estimates of Australian east coast humpback whales (Megaptera novaeangliae) , 2020 .