Efficacy of an acoustic hailing device as an avian dispersal tool
ABSTRACT Bird strikes are a major safety and financial concern for modern aviation. Audible stimuli are common bird dispersal techniques, but their effectiveness is limited by the saliency and relevance of the stimulus. Furthermore, high ambient sound levels present at airfields might require that e...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Wiley
2017-09-01
|
| Series: | Wildlife Society Bulletin |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1002/wsb.797 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1850116978988023808 |
|---|---|
| author | Peter E. Schlichting Amanda E. Holland James C. Beasley Albert L. Bryan Robert A. Kennamer Travis L. DeVault Bradley F. Blackwell Olin E. Rhodes Jr. |
| author_facet | Peter E. Schlichting Amanda E. Holland James C. Beasley Albert L. Bryan Robert A. Kennamer Travis L. DeVault Bradley F. Blackwell Olin E. Rhodes Jr. |
| author_sort | Peter E. Schlichting |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | ABSTRACT Bird strikes are a major safety and financial concern for modern aviation. Audible stimuli are common bird dispersal techniques, but their effectiveness is limited by the saliency and relevance of the stimulus. Furthermore, high ambient sound levels present at airfields might require that effective audible stimuli rely more on total volume (i.e., exceeding physiological tolerances) than ecological relevance. Acoustic hailing devices (AHD) are capable of sound output with a narrow beam width and at volumes high enough to cause physical discomfort at long distances. We tested the effectiveness of an AHD as a dispersal tool on free‐ranging birds recognized as hazardous to aviation safety at the Savannah River Site and Phinizy Swamp Nature Park in South Carolina and Georgia, USA, respectively, between October 2013 and March 2015. Our study design included experimental trials with timed‐interval counts of birds directly before and after AHD treatment. For most species, counts of birds associated with treatment periods (use of AHD) and control periods (no use of AHD) occurred on different days. Sound treatments yielded variable success at dispersing birds. Specifically, AHD treatment was effective for dispersing vultures (Coragyps atratus and Cathartes aura) and gulls (Laridae), but ineffective for dispersing blackbirds (Icteridae), diving ducks (Aythya spp., Bucephala spp., Oxyura spp.), and coots (Fulica americana). Trials were conducted in a relatively quiet environment with birds that were unhabituated to excessive noise; thus, we cannot unequivocally recommend an AHD as a universally effective avian dispersing tool. However, future research should consider AHD testing integrated with other methods, as well as investigation of treatments that might be salient to specific target species. © 2017 The Wildlife Society. |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-a2f43380e27d4a83b3fa0094c864b564 |
| institution | OA Journals |
| issn | 2328-5540 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2017-09-01 |
| publisher | Wiley |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Wildlife Society Bulletin |
| spelling | doaj-art-a2f43380e27d4a83b3fa0094c864b5642025-08-20T02:36:12ZengWileyWildlife Society Bulletin2328-55402017-09-0141345346010.1002/wsb.797Efficacy of an acoustic hailing device as an avian dispersal toolPeter E. Schlichting0Amanda E. Holland1James C. Beasley2Albert L. Bryan3Robert A. Kennamer4Travis L. DeVault5Bradley F. Blackwell6Olin E. Rhodes Jr.7Savannah River Ecology LaboratoryUniversity of GeorgiaP.O. Drawer EAikenSC29802USASavannah River Ecology LaboratoryUniversity of GeorgiaP.O. Drawer EAikenSC29802USASavannah River Ecology LaboratoryUniversity of GeorgiaP.O. Drawer EAikenSC29802USASavannah River Ecology LaboratoryUniversity of GeorgiaP.O. Drawer EAikenSC29802USASavannah River Ecology LaboratoryUniversity of GeorgiaP.O. Drawer EAikenSC29802USAU.S. Department of Agriculture/Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service/Wildlife Services National Wildlife Research CenterOhio Field Station, 6100 Columbus AvenueSanduskyOH44870USAU.S. Department of Agriculture/Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service/Wildlife Services National Wildlife Research CenterOhio Field Station, 6100 Columbus AvenueSanduskyOH44870USASavannah River Ecology LaboratoryUniversity of GeorgiaP.O. Drawer EAikenSC29802USAABSTRACT Bird strikes are a major safety and financial concern for modern aviation. Audible stimuli are common bird dispersal techniques, but their effectiveness is limited by the saliency and relevance of the stimulus. Furthermore, high ambient sound levels present at airfields might require that effective audible stimuli rely more on total volume (i.e., exceeding physiological tolerances) than ecological relevance. Acoustic hailing devices (AHD) are capable of sound output with a narrow beam width and at volumes high enough to cause physical discomfort at long distances. We tested the effectiveness of an AHD as a dispersal tool on free‐ranging birds recognized as hazardous to aviation safety at the Savannah River Site and Phinizy Swamp Nature Park in South Carolina and Georgia, USA, respectively, between October 2013 and March 2015. Our study design included experimental trials with timed‐interval counts of birds directly before and after AHD treatment. For most species, counts of birds associated with treatment periods (use of AHD) and control periods (no use of AHD) occurred on different days. Sound treatments yielded variable success at dispersing birds. Specifically, AHD treatment was effective for dispersing vultures (Coragyps atratus and Cathartes aura) and gulls (Laridae), but ineffective for dispersing blackbirds (Icteridae), diving ducks (Aythya spp., Bucephala spp., Oxyura spp.), and coots (Fulica americana). Trials were conducted in a relatively quiet environment with birds that were unhabituated to excessive noise; thus, we cannot unequivocally recommend an AHD as a universally effective avian dispersing tool. However, future research should consider AHD testing integrated with other methods, as well as investigation of treatments that might be salient to specific target species. © 2017 The Wildlife Society.https://doi.org/10.1002/wsb.797AHDairport safetybird strikeslong‐range acoustic device |
| spellingShingle | Peter E. Schlichting Amanda E. Holland James C. Beasley Albert L. Bryan Robert A. Kennamer Travis L. DeVault Bradley F. Blackwell Olin E. Rhodes Jr. Efficacy of an acoustic hailing device as an avian dispersal tool Wildlife Society Bulletin AHD airport safety bird strikes long‐range acoustic device |
| title | Efficacy of an acoustic hailing device as an avian dispersal tool |
| title_full | Efficacy of an acoustic hailing device as an avian dispersal tool |
| title_fullStr | Efficacy of an acoustic hailing device as an avian dispersal tool |
| title_full_unstemmed | Efficacy of an acoustic hailing device as an avian dispersal tool |
| title_short | Efficacy of an acoustic hailing device as an avian dispersal tool |
| title_sort | efficacy of an acoustic hailing device as an avian dispersal tool |
| topic | AHD airport safety bird strikes long‐range acoustic device |
| url | https://doi.org/10.1002/wsb.797 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT petereschlichting efficacyofanacoustichailingdeviceasanaviandispersaltool AT amandaeholland efficacyofanacoustichailingdeviceasanaviandispersaltool AT jamescbeasley efficacyofanacoustichailingdeviceasanaviandispersaltool AT albertlbryan efficacyofanacoustichailingdeviceasanaviandispersaltool AT robertakennamer efficacyofanacoustichailingdeviceasanaviandispersaltool AT travisldevault efficacyofanacoustichailingdeviceasanaviandispersaltool AT bradleyfblackwell efficacyofanacoustichailingdeviceasanaviandispersaltool AT olinerhodesjr efficacyofanacoustichailingdeviceasanaviandispersaltool |