↓ Skip to main content

Responses of wintering geese to the designation of goose foraging areas in The Netherlands

Overview of attention for article published in Ambio: A Journal of the Human Environment, February 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (90th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (84th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
twitter
3 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
29 Mendeley
Title
Responses of wintering geese to the designation of goose foraging areas in The Netherlands
Published in
Ambio: A Journal of the Human Environment, February 2017
DOI 10.1007/s13280-016-0885-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kees Koffijberg, Hans Schekkerman, Henk van der Jeugd, Menno Hornman, Erik van Winden

Abstract

The Netherlands is important for wintering migratory herbivorous geese, numbers of which have rapidly increased, leading to conflict with agriculture. In 2005/2006, a new goose management policy aimed to limit compensation payments to farmers by concentrating foraging geese in 80 000 ha of designated 'go' areas-where farmers received payment to accommodate them-and scaring geese from 'no go' areas elsewhere. Monthly national counts of four abundant goose species during 10 years prior to the new policy and in 8 years following implementation found that 57% of all goose days were spent within 'go' areas under the new management, the same as prior to implementation. Such lack of response suggests no predicted learning effects, perhaps because of (i) increases in abundance outside of 'go' areas, (ii) irregularly shaped boundaries and enclaves of 'no go' farmland within 'go' areas and/or (iii) insufficient differences in disturbance levels within and outside designated areas.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 29 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 3%
Unknown 28 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 8 28%
Student > Bachelor 5 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 14%
Unspecified 4 14%
Researcher 4 14%
Other 4 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 16 55%
Unspecified 7 24%
Environmental Science 4 14%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 1 3%
Social Sciences 1 3%
Other 0 0%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 21. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 13 March 2017.
All research outputs
#527,961
of 9,732,824 outputs
Outputs from Ambio: A Journal of the Human Environment
#64
of 712 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#25,325
of 255,274 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Ambio: A Journal of the Human Environment
#4
of 25 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 9,732,824 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 712 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 255,274 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 25 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.