Sapro-Zoonotic Risks Posed by Wild Birds in Agricultural Landscapes

There are over 1400 catalogued human pathogens, with approximately 62% classified as zoonotic (Taylor et al., 2001). Most evidence of direct transmission of pathogens to humans involves domestic and companion animals, whereas the reservoir for most zoonoses is wildlife; yet there are relatively few well-documented cases for the direct involvement of transmission from wildlife to humans (Kruse et al., 2004). In part, this absence of evidence reflects the mobility of wildlife, the difficulty accessing relevant samples, and the smaller number of studies focused on characterizing wildlife pathogens relative to the human and veterinary literature (McDiarmid, 1969; Davis et al., 1971; Hubalek, 2004).

COMPLETE CONTROL OF NUISANCE BIRDS IN AIRPORT HANGARS

Fogging of ReJeX-iT7 TP-40 offers a very efficient method for the control and dispersal of nuisance birds from many diverse areas. The amount of the repellent is greatly reduced over any other control method. The method is direct and is independent of the activity of the birds. The applications with any fogger, thermal or mechanical, that can deliver droplets of less than 20 microns, can be manually or fully automated and pose only minimal risks to operators or animals. All birds that became a nuisance and safety problem in the hangars of TWA and AA at LaGuardia, and TWA warehouse at Newark Airport were successfully driven out by fogging ReJeX-iT7 TP-40 with a Curtis Dyna-Fog AGolden Eagle@ thermal fogger.

AGRICULTURAL BIRD PROBLEMS IN THE SOUTHEAST

Our chairman has wisely asked that we not spend all of our time here telling each other about our bird problems. In the Southeast, our difficulties with blackbirds are based upon the same bird habits that cause trouble elsewhere: they flock, they roost and they eat, generally taking advantage of the readily available handouts that today's agricul¬tural practices provide. Those of us on the receiving end of these de¬predations of course think that damage in our own particular area must be far the worst, anywhere. Because of the location of our meeting place today, perhaps it is worthwhile to point out that a report prepared by our Bureau's Washington office this year outlined the problem of blackbird damage to corn in the Middle Atlantic States, the Great Lakes Region and in Florida, and then followed with this statement--"An equally serious problem occurs in rice and grain sorghum fields of Arkansas, Mississippi, Texas and Louisiana." The report also men¬tions that the largest winter concentrations of blackbirds are found in the lower Mississippi Valley. Our 1963-64 blackbird-starling survey showed 43 principal roosts totaling approximately 100 million of these birds in Virginia, the Carolinas, Georgia, Alabama, Tennessee and Kentucky. We have our own birds during the summer plus the "tourist" birds from up here and elsewhere during the winter, and all of these birds must eat, so suffice it to say that we, too, have some bird problems in the Southeast. I'm sure you're more interested in what we're doing about them. To keep this in perspective also, please bear in mind that against the magnitude of these problems, our blackbird control research staff at Gainesville consists of 3 biologists, 1 biochemist and one technician. And unfortunately, none of us happens to be a miracle worker. I think, though, we have made great progress toward solving the bird problems in the Southeast for the man-hours that have been expended in this re¬search. My only suggestion to those who are impatient about not having more answers is that they examine the budget that has been set up for this work. Only then could we intelligently discuss what might be expected as a reasonable rate of research progress. When I think about what we have accomplished in a short span of time, with very small expenditure, I can assure you that I am very proud of our small research crew at Gainesville--and I say this quite sincerely. At the Gainesville station, we work under two general research approaches to the bird damage problem. These projects have been assigned to us. The first is research on management of birds, particularly blackbirds and starlings destructive to crops or in feedlots, and, secondly, the development and the adaptation of those chemical compounds found to be toxic to birds but relatively safe to mammals. These approaches both require laboratory and field work that is further subdivided into several specific research projects. Without describing the details of these now, I want to mention some of our recent results. From the results, I'm sure you will gather the general objectives and some of the procedures used.

Refuge Update – March/April 2009, Volume 6, Number 2

Table of Contents: America’s Birds: In an Alarming State Snakes Alive! Title Sub Title East Coast Wetlands Are Disappearing Chief’s Corner: What We Do Now Extreme Makeover for Bird Sightings by Mike Carlo Taking Care of Our World War II Legacy by Lisa Matlock Whatever Happened to . . . . San Francisco Bay Wetland Restoration Projects Recalling the Battle of Long Island Sound by David Klinger Bold Approaches for Climate Change How Alligator River Refuge Is Planning and Adapting by Mike Bryant Rapid Climate Change Is Transforming the Arctic by David Payer Tracking Change on Wildlife Refuges by Kathy Granillo Where SLAMM Foretells a Wetter Future Reviving the Land – and the Air by Bob Ford and Pete Jerome Connecting the Conservation Landscape a New Priority by Mike Scott and Bob Adamcik Awards for Refuge System Palmyra Atoll Refuge Becomes Ramsar Site Not So Strategic Habitat Conservation: A True Story by David Viker Putting Food on Alaskan Tables by Andy Aderman

Compressed Air, Wooden Clappers, and Other Non-Traditional Methods for Dispersing European Starlings from an Urban Roost

During autumn 2003, several thousand European starlings (Sturnus vulgaris) began roosting on exposed I-beams in a newly constructed, decorative glass canopy that covered the passenger pick-up area at the terminal building for Cleveland Hopkins International Airport, Ohio. The use of lethal control or conventional dispersal techniques, such as pyrotechnics and fire hoses, were not feasible in the airport terminal area. The design and aesthetics of the structure precluded the use of netting and other exclusion materials. In January 2004, an attempt was made to disperse the birds using recorded predator and distress calls broadcast from speakers installed in the structure. This technique failed to disperse the birds. In February 2004, we developed a technique using compressed air to physically and audibly harass the birds. We used a trailer-mounted commercial air compressor producing 185 cubic feet per minute of air at 100 pounds per square inch pressure and a 20-foot long, 1-inch diameter PVC pipe attached to the outlet hose. One person slowly (< 5 mph) drove a pick-up truck through the airport terminal at dusk while the second person sat on a bench in the truck bed and directed the compressed air from the pipe into the canopy to harass starlings attempting to enter the roost site. After 5 consecutive nights of compressed-air harassment, virtually no starlings attempted to roost in the canopy. Once familiar with the physical effects of the compressed air, the birds dispersed at the sound of the air. Only occasional harassment at dusk was needed through the remainder of the winter to keep the canopy free of starlings. Similar harassment with the compressor was conducted successfully in autumn 2004 with the addition of a modified leaf blower, wooden clappers, and laser. In conclusion, we found compressed air to be a safe, unobtrusive, and effective method for dispersing starlings from an urban roost site. This technique would likely be applicable for other urban-roosting species such as crows, house sparrows, and blackbirds.

Thermal Imagery Applied to Reducing Bird Hazards to Aircraft at Airports

Airports worldwide are at a disadvantage when it comes to being able to spot birds and warn aircrews about the location of flocks either on the ground or close to the airfield. Birds simply cannot be easily seen during the day and are nearly invisible targets for planes at night or during low visibility. Thermal imaging (infrared) devices can be used to allow ground and tower personnel to pinpoint bird locations day or night, thus giving the airport operators the ability to launch countermeasures or simply warn the aircrews. This technology is available now, though it has been predominately isolated to medical and military system modifications. The cost of these devices has dropped significantly in recent years as technology, capability, and availability have continued to increase. Davison Army Airfield (DAAF), which is located about 20 miles south of Ronald Reagan National Airport in Washington, DC, is the transient home to many bird species including an abundance of ducks, seagulls, pigeons, and migrating Canadian geese. Over the past few years, DAAF implemented a variety of measures in an attempt to control the bird hazards on the airfield. Unfortunately, when it came to controlling these birds on or near our runways and aircraft movement areas we were more reactive than proactive. We would do airfield checks several times an hour to detect and deter any birds in these areas. The deterrents used included vehicle/human presence, pyrotechnics, and the periodic use of a trained border collie. At the time, we felt like we were doing all we could to reduce the threat to aircraft and human life. It was not until a near fatal accident in October 1998, when we truly realized how dangerous our operating environment really was to aircraft at or near the airfield. It was at this time, we had a C-12 (twin-engine passenger plane) land on our primary runway at night. The tower cleared the aircraft to land, and upon touchdown to the runway the aircraft collided with a flock of geese. Neither the tower nor the crew of the aircraft saw the geese because they were obscured in the darkness. The end result was 12 dead geese and $374,000 damage to the C-12. Fortunately, there were no human fatalities, but it was painfully clear we needed to improve our method of clearing the runway at night and during low visibility conditions. It was through this realization that we ventured to the U.S. Army Communications and Electronics Command for ideas on ways to deal with our threat. It was through a sub-organization within this command, Night Vision Labs, that we realized the possibilities of modifying thermal imagery and infrared technology to detecting wildlife on airports.

DEVELOPMENTAL STATUS OF N-(3-CHLORO-4-METHYLPHENYL) ACETAMIDE AS A CANDIDATE BLACKBIRD/STARLING ROOST TOXICANT

Large winter roosts of blackbirds (Icteridae) and starlings (Sturnus vulgaris) often cause conflicts, both real and imagined, between the birds and local human popula- tions. These conflicts may range from objections to the noise and odor engendered by thousands or millions of birds, to fear of epidemic human and livestock diseases, and the possibility of economic losses from crop depredations. Many people believe the most direct way to combat these conflicts is to reduce local roosting populations by kill- ing the birds. In response to this perceived need for a roost toxicant, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) developed PA-14, a surfactant which can be aerially applied to problem roosts for population reduction (Lefebvre and Seubert 1970). Successful use of this material, however, requires concurrent rainfall and low temperatures, conditions which may not occur sufficiently often to permit roost treatment at desired times or places. Because of this difficulty, and continued pressures from management person- nel and the agricultural community, the Service has continued its search for a safe, ef- fective roost toxicant usable without severe weather restrictions. One of the current candidate materials is N-(3-chloro-4-methylphenyl)acetamide (CAT, DRC-2698), a derivative of StarlicideR (DRC-1339). This compound was initially developed by S.A. Peoples of the University of California-Davis (Peoples et al. 1976). California researchers are still investigating the avicidal potential of CAT, mainly on baits and in wick perches, while FWS interest has centered thus far on its possible utility as an aerially applied roost treatment. This report is a summary of our investigations to date.