Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Wildlife and aviation can be a dangerous combination. Airport managers and other transpor- tation safety and security officials have spent significant financial and personnel resources in an effort to prevent or mitigate the possibility of aircraft collisions with wildlife. In the past two decades, wildlife strikes have increased fivefold, from 1,770 reported in 1990 to 10,083 reported in 2011. The rise in strikes results in part from increases in bird populations, with 13 of the 14 largest bird species showing significant population increases over this period. Since 1988, wildlife strikes to civil aircraft have resulted in at least 24 deaths and 235 injuries in the United States, and 250 deaths and the destruction of more than 220 aircraft globally. They also have led to annual direct economic losses to civil aircraft that were con- servatively estimated by Allan in 2002 to exceed $1.2 billion worldwide and have caused nearly 600,000 hours of aircraft downtime. In the United States alone, damage costs exceed $625 million annually (Wildlife Strikes to Civil Aircraft in the United States, 1990â2010). Factors that contribute to this increasing threat are expanding populations of large birds and increasing air traffic by quieter, turbofan-powered aircraft (Wildlife Strikes to Civil Aircraft in the United States, 1990â2011). Following the highly publicized bird strike that forced US Airways Flight 1549 to make an emergency landing in the Hudson River in January 2009, public awareness of wildlife collisions with aircraft is at an all-time high. In response, more airports primarily attempt to manage and control wildlife risk using techniques such as habitat manipulation, harassment, deterrence, and exclusion, with varying degrees of effec- tiveness. However, as part of an integrated wildlife population management program, more direct wildlife population control methods such as lethal and nonlethal trapping; the use of pesticides and chemicals; roost site, nest, and egg destruction; and even live-ammunition shooting may be necessary. Currently, research-backed information on these approaches to wildlife population management at airports is often scattered throughout numerous different disciplines and research fields, with few efforts made to develop a comprehensive synthesis of population management techniques. ACRP Synthesis 23: Bird Harassment, Repellent, and Deterrent Techniques for Use on and Near Airports provided a synthesis of nonlethal wildlife control measures focusing on birds. The objective of this current synthesis is to provide airport managers, operators, and biologists with a document that supplements ACRP Synthesis 23 through a review of more direct wildlife population control techniques for reducing wildlife collisions with aircraft. The combined information from the two syntheses will provide a foundation for airports in their development of an effective integrated wildlife population control strategy and program. To gather relevant information on current practices, primary and secondary literature was reviewed using multiple data sources. In addition, 15 airports (100% response rate) covering a broad range of biological habitats and conditions across the United States from all nine FAA regions were surveyed to obtain quantitative and qualitative information on existing wildlife population control methods and integrated management approaches currently used and their perceived effectiveness. Using information from the literature, combined with the survey results, the various direct wildlife population control techniques and their relative effectiveness were synthesized. The ecological foundation of wildlife population control and management is also summarized. As expected, wildlife population control techniques can vary markedly at both the avian and mammalian species levels, as well as at avian and Summary airport Wildlife population management
2 mammalian guild levels. Appropriate wildlife population control measures are dependent on factors such as habitat, wildlife abundance and distribution, density, seasonality, fidelity, and physiological characteristics. Successful integrated approaches to wildlife population control and management consistently include appropriate use of habitat management, harassment, repellent, and exclusion techniques (ACRP Synthesis 23) supplemented with more direct wildlife population control measures, to include lethal control, as necessary (this synthesis). Overall, the integration of both approaches to wildlife population control is often more effective than reliance on a single approach. Because many of these wildlife population control measures and population manage- ment approaches do not have sufficient empirical evidence to support or refute the long-term effectiveness of the techniques being employed under different circumstances, continued assessment of these techniques is necessary. This may be accomplished initially through quantification of techniques currently used at airports, combined with more directed scientific studies. Additionally, reviews of other aspects of wildlife population control and integrated management techniques at airports focusing on habitat modification and effects on popula- tion control are warranted. This synthesis may provide impetus to undertake research that could lead to more refined approaches for the further evaluation of wildlife population con- trol effectiveness on airports, the potential effect on metapopulations outside the airport boundaries, and broader recommendations to advance the science of aviation wildlife hazard mitigation.
