@article {41636, title = {Do Canada geese (Branta canadensis Linnaeus, 1758) carry infectious agents for birds and man?}, journal = {European Journal of Wildlife Research}, volume = {50}, year = {2004}, pages = {78{\textendash}84}, abstract = {

Currently, large groups of Canada geese (Branta canadensis Linnaeus, 1758) aggregate in recreational areas of north-western Germany. Questions have arisen as to whether these birds represent a special risk factor as a source of zoonotic agents for humans and as a source of viruses, causing notifiable or reportable diseases, for domestic poultry and waterfowl. To answer these questions, a total of 289 eggs were collected in 2002 and 2003 on a recreation site and assayed. Chlamydia psittaci was not isolated and neither was chlamydial antigen detected by polymerase chain reaction. All virus-isolation attempts were unsuccessful. Neither Salmonella spp. nor Campylobacter spp. was isolated from embryonic tissues, chorioallantoic membranes or yolk-sac membranes. The presence of antibodies against Newcastle disease virus and influenza A virus (haemagglutinin subtypes H5 and H7) was demonstrated in egg yolk. Antibodies were also detected against the egg-drop syndrome 1976 and duck plague viruses. It is concluded that further surveillance studies are needed for a reliable risk assessment.

}, issn = {1439-0574}, doi = {10.1007/s10344-004-0044-1}, url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10344-004-0044-1}, author = {B{\"o}nner, Brigitte M. and Lutz, Walburga and J{\"a}ger, Sabine and Redmann, T. and Reinhardt, B. and Reichel, U. and Krajewski, V. and Weiss, R. and Wissing, J. and Knickmeier, W. and Gerlich, W. H. and Wend, Ulrike C. and Kaleta, E. F.} } @article {Marks2004, title = {Movements of urban Canada geese: implications for nicarbazin treatment programs}, journal = {USDA National Wildlife {\l}dots}, year = {2004}, pages = {151{\textendash}156}, keywords = {6 million resident canada, behavior, branta canadensis, canada geese, fertility control, Geese, life damage management, movement, nicarbazin}, url = {http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1389\&context=icwdm\_usdanwrc}, author = {VerCauteren, Kurt C. and Marks, David R.} } @article {Sankaran2004, title = {Large herbivores suppress decomposer abundance in a semiarid grazing ecosystem}, journal = {Ecology}, volume = {85}, number = {4}, year = {2004}, pages = {1052{\textendash}1061}, publisher = {Eco Soc America}, keywords = {aboveground primary production, from plant litter just, grazing, it has been estimated, microbial activity, microbial biomass, re-, savanna, soil organic carbon, suffice to meet maintenance, that annual c inputs, to soils}, url = {http://www.esajournals.org/doi/abs/10.1890/03-0354}, author = {Sankaran, M. and Augustine, D.J.} } @article {Beale2004, title = {Human disturbance: people as predation-free predators?}, journal = {Journal of Applied Ecology}, volume = {41}, number = {2}, year = {2004}, month = {apr}, pages = {335{\textendash}343}, abstract = {

1
Human disturbance has been associated with declines in breeding success in numerous species and is of general concern to conservationists. However, the current framework for predicting and minimizing disturbance effects is weak and there is considerable uncertainty about why animals are disturbed by people in the first place.
2
We developed a behavioural model of perceived predation risk as a framework for understanding the effects of disturbance on cliff-nesting birds. This encompassed the concept that the effects of disturbance should increase with increasing numbers of visitors, and decrease with distance from the nest, an insight ignored in current conservation practice.
3
The predictions of this model were tested using field data on nesting success in two species of seabird, kittiwake Rissa tridactyla and guillemot Uria aalge. Statistical models of nesting success in both species suggested that perceived predation risk is a good predictor of the effects of disturbance.
4
Synthesis and applications. Our findings suggest that fixed set-back distances and buffer zones are likely to be inappropriate conservation measures in situations where the numbers of visitors to wildlife areas fluctuates spatially and temporally, as is generally the case. In managing access to wildlife areas there is a need to ensure that larger parties of visitors are kept further away from the nesting areas of vulnerable species or that set-back distances are determined for the largest party likely to visit the site.

}, issn = {0021-8901}, doi = {10.1111/j.0021-8901.2004.00900.x}, url = {http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/links/doi/10.1111/j.0021-8901.2004.00900.x}, author = {Beale, Colin M. and Monaghan, Pat} }