Geese return twice as quickly if you try to shoo them away | Hacker News Reader

Geese return twice as quickly if you try to shoo them away

newscientist.com

87 pointsGavCo77 comments

>Geese chased out of a park in Chicago returned to the area twice as quickly on days when they were harassed, compared with days when they left of their own accord

Because the reason they left was no longer valid, whereas when they left of their own accord presumably the reason was still valid (had eaten all the food, bad nesting, noise etc)

Exactly as the paper author explains in this article https://www.eurekalert.org/news-releases/972608

Perhaps. On the other hand, I choose to believe the geese return out of spite.

Indeed. It is important to leave as much poop on the walking paths as they can. Dropping density correlating directly with amount of food resources extracted also nicely correlates with spite. It’s good to maximize both before moving on to victimize the next territory and path.

Thank you for the laugh. I’m not convinced though that this is not their though process.

This is the first time I’ve seen humor on this site. If I were you, I’d be afraid

He won’t last very long here.

Every time Reddit alienates the top 5%, part of them flow here still peddling the memes and vestiges of the old dominion. Over time this sheds as they're welcomed into the fold, and we get a bit less staunch.

We accept you, one of us, one of us

I am not sure about geese but crows definitely do things out of spite.

Peace was never an option. -UGG

Each goose thought, "ah, the flock has been cleared out. Now the field is all easy pickings. I will be clever one and return alone to reap a fat feast!"

An excellent case study on data being pointless. The title might as well be “Geese want to be where humans don’t want them to be, probably for food or habitat reasons.”

They’re not twice as likely to return if shooed away. They want to be in certain places because they instinctively know it’s a good spot for resources so they’ll keep trying. The shooing had little to do with them returning or not.

The data is poorly worded, but it does give insight into the fact that shooting isn't as effective as a goose deterrent

Well at the very least, shooing isn't effective. Shooting seems like it'd be a very permanent goose deterrent.

The shot goose isn’t ever coming back

I'm going to own the typo and leave it.

Geese are easily startled, but they'll soon be back, and in greater numbers.

Only the sand geese though.

Where I live, Canadian Geese were here all over the place, pooping everywhere. Then 2 year-round swans moved in, the geese disappeared and have not been back. Seems they hate each other.

Canadian Geese are notoriously insecure - everyone wants to take pictures of pretty swans, but no one wants to look at the crazy geese, standing in their own feces and hissing at each other. They can't handle the emotional trauma, so they leave...

It's sad, really...

Swans are also mean. You don't want to mess with one.

Canada geese, not Canadian.

How do we know the geese the OP speak of were not Canadian?

Could be Canada Geese from Canada which would then properly be Canadian Canada Geese.

Could be any other species of Goose from Canada which would still be Canadian Geese, but just not Canadian Canada Geese (or is that Canadian non-Canada Geese?).

If you want to pedantically split hairs, why stop 1/2 way. We need a xkcd style venn diagram here.

This is a great solution. But it’s a rough one for people to comprehend.

I live in a small town with a lake and a popular local swimming beach. During the summer parking is $25/car. When the geese end up closing the beach due to their excrement raising harmful bacteria levels, the town loses that revenue. In addition, the park by the lake hosts after school programs and the amount of goose feces on the ground can become biblical in scale.

Being an engineer and scientist I ran the numbers. The town could purchase a pair of swans for $1200 each weekend and come out ahead. Eventually a pair would stick around, right? I still find it amusing that a few people think the geese are pretty or that we should do things to attract them.

Nope. Just very angry birds that are over populated and a health risk.

This headline is clearly tailored to make it seem like spite or whatever, but it is clear _after_ the headline: if you shoo them away from where they want to be they come back, whereas if they no longer want to be there and leave they don't come back.

This is like saying "people come back to their homes when I random set off their fire alarm at a much higher rate than when they decide to sell their home and buy a new house somewhere else".

truly hilarious

Airports use lasers and pyrotechnics to get rid of them.

https://www.birdcontrolgroup.com/chasing-away-the-geese-at-d...

And mass culling. After AWE1549 landed on the Hudson river 70,000 birds were killed around New York to try and stop it happening again.

Who would ever guess that there would be a massive amount of birds near a river?

>The giant Canada goose subspecies was believed to be extinct in the 1950s until, in 1962, a small flock was discovered wintering in Rochester, Minnesota, by Harold Hanson of the Illinois Natural History Survey.

No good deed ever goes unpunished.

Geese love Rochester https://www.atlasobscura.com/articles/a-minnesota-towns-love...

Maybe they should open a restaurant nearby. Source your food locally...

Canada geese have a mild flavor that results in good eating; done properly, it resembles lean beef in texture. https://www.themeateater.com/hunt/geese/a-species-profile-on...

Is it legal to hunt them ?

Yes, during hunting season.

But no, not in the park, by the playground, near the kids...

The kids should know where the food on their tables comes from.

I fully agree with this. I’ve personally often thought about starting a summer camp that is basically just farm work for kids, have them raise chickens, goats, etc and at the end of the summer there’s a big feast… but the kids also participate in the slaughter so there’s no doubt in their mind where food comes from.

You can call it Dahmer Factory.

Please tell that to the city of Fargo

https://12ft.io/proxy?q=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.inforum.com%2Fnews...

There's at least some states with hunting seasons (didn't try to do a comprehensive check).

In general, city parks are not open to hunting, so hunting wouldn't necessarily help much with the geese that occupy them.

I say necessarily because I can imagine a scenario where some particular flock of geese that spends time in a park also spends time on land that is open to hunting. Possible, but probably not that common.

> In general, city parks are not open to hunting, [...]

What about trapping?

It is legal to kill pest animals in Canada. Prairie dogs are a good example. Unfortunately geese are a protected species due to a 1918 law, so no, any hunting or killing is a federal crime and subject to fines.

Update: Hunting in designated areas is permitted if a license is obtained [1].

[1] https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/regulations/SOR-2022-105...

Yes- in accordance with state and local hunting laws. Typically this means only during a specified time between December and February, and almost certainly not in the vicinity of inhabited dwellings.

Geese are smart, they figure out where they aren't hunted and congregate in these areas.

In areas where hunting is feasible (shooting lines over hundreds of yards of water; goose loads lose their energy pretty quickly compared to rifle or pistol rounds), regular hunting will deter geese from the area. That said, even a suppressed 12ga will have loud (140 dB) reports that won't fly in urban areas.

(If y'all couldn't tell, I hunt waterfowl)

This is why one normally uses a sword to hunt geese in a built-up area.

There’s also resident goose populations — some states have seasons specifically for resident geese (dates when migratory birds are for the most part absent). Bag limits in those seasons are significantly higher. Unfortunately resident geese have vermin status around northeast US. Do you know if many hunters take advantage of resident geese seasons?

In Michigan we'd use a potato gun (for the noise) to scare them off, as well as very low velocity bb guns (hit the foot of one, they alarm and the flock leaves). The ultimate device to keep those poop machines away was my Australian Shepherd - sending her out to chase kept them away for a day+

The best way to deal with Canadian geese is an unneutered off-leash lab around a year old.

Things I have learned in life that were not obvious include "do not mess with geese" (or crows).

They are way smarter and more aggressive than you might ever imagine.

There's a reason why they use geese as "watchdogs"

You wouldn't be shooing them away if there wasn't something there to shoo them away from. It's just logical.

While parks and ponds are unusable because of geese poo. I love animals so i am not sure what to make of this

That we should probably learn to live with geese poo. We have a problem with crows poo in the city where I live, but I’d take that one thousand times over not having any crows at all, or geese, for that matter.

Pigeons are a little different because they’re mostly city-wide pets as things stand right now, they don’t seem to fill any “needed” ecological niche, but I may be wrong on that.

> Pigeons are a little different because they’re mostly city-wide pets as things stand right now, they don’t seem to fill any “needed” ecological niche, but I may be wrong on that.

What is “needed”? How do you even define that? (And are you filling a “needed exological niche”?)

That’s why I used quotes. Supposedly crows around these parts eat mice and even rats, which is good enough reason for me to define it as filling a “needed ecological niche”.

> city-wide pets

Did you mean "pests"?

Goes both ways.

I do have a lady close to me that treats them as pets, meaning she feeds them regularly. Some small kids also play with them, more exactly running after them, the same way as they’d play with dogs, let’s say.

Their dung was harvested in Persia, and it still is today.

This could be done in cities.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31885525

Cull them. Controlling their numbers and loving animals are not mutually exclusive.

Less violent alternatives include:

Finding nests and oiling the eggs to prevent them from developing.

Landscaping parks to include more tall grass and similar obstructions to sight lines. Geese are comfortable where they can see predators a long way away.

Oiling eggs seems like a laborious and environmentally bad solution (oil, even vegetable oil, being dumped everywhere and flowing into ponds doesn’t seem good).

If you’re going to strangle eggs, I think there are much more efficient methods.

Not to mention that modifying landscaping is not always a viable option.

There isn't a one-size-fits-all answer to conflicts between humans and wildlife, but I think generally speaking killing the wildlife shouldn't be plan A. Other options should be tried first when the wildlife isn't an imminent danger to people, including changes to human-made habitats, changes to human behavior, and non-lethal population control.

Putting enough tall grass in a park to keep geese away would also have the consequence of making it keep humans away. Some untouched areas are fine, but if geese are avoiding it because they sense danger, humans will do the same. It comes with the reality of snakes, and worse, ticks.

Nobody will let their kids play there and no adults will run or relax there. It’d be closed off and paved over if it’s meant as an urban park.

Tall grass is not the only option for reducing sightlines near the shore of lakes/ponds, and reducing sightlines is not the only option for reducing the appeal of an area to geese. Another comment suggested introducing a pair of swans, though that also has potential downsides (swans can be aggressive toward humans).

I lack the expertise to offer a comprehensive environmental impact analysis, but it is an established population control technique. I suspect the amount of oil used is small enough that it doesn't have a significant environmental impact.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goose_egg_addling

Less violent alternatives may have unwanted consequences, while killing animals is something that actually benefits their genetic pools. It's amazing how usually animal lovers and knowledge don't intersect

Introducing natural predators might improve the gene pool of a wild animal population, but humans randomly selecting animals to kill does not. Of course, introducing predators is almost certain to have unwanted consequences.

How can you say that? Dogs and cattle survived to this day by being killed (or neutered) by humans. It's a win genetically

I can say that easily; culling a population of free-roaming wild animals because people believe there are too many of them is very different from breeding a population of captive domestic animals with a goal of achieving specific results.

As for whether humans are good at breeding when done intentionally, the evidence is a bit equivocal. Mixed breed dogs and cats are usually much less prone to heritable health issues than purebred, but I think that's less true for farm animals where health issues impact profits.

We probably don't have enough evidence to say something about my point, even less for culling. Let me restate "love for animals and knowledge don't intersect" as "love for animals and skepticism don't intersect"

Can confirm, these birds are the least polite Canadians I know.

Interested in the state on shooting away rather than shooing.

Great. You know exactly where to shoot them..

Any work-arounds for the paywall?

The U of I's own article has more details: https://aces.illinois.edu/news/study-canada-geese-beat-human...

https://wildlife.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/ws...

HN guidelines ask for links to the original article rather than a news summary. This is a perfect example of why.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com