A Fixed Netting System as a Means of Excluding Birds From a Domestic Waste Landfill

Many bird species are attracted to landfills which take domestic or putrescible waste. These sites provide a reliable, rich source of food which can attract large concentrations of birds. The birds may cause conflicts with human interest with respect to noise, birds carrying litter off site, possible transmission of pathogens in bird droppings and the potential for birdstrikes. In the UK there is an 8 mile safeguarding radius around an airfield, within which any planning applications must pass scrutiny from regulatory bodies to show they will not attract birds into the area and increase the birdstrike risk. Peckfield Landfill site near Leeds, West Yorkshire was chosen for a trial of a netting system designed to exclude birds from domestic waste landfills. The site was assessed for bird numbers before the trial, during the netting trial and after the net had been removed. A ScanCord net was installed for 6 weeks, during which time all household waste was tipped inside the net. Gull numbers decreased on the site from a mean of 1074 per hourly count to 29 per hourly count after two days. The gull numbers increased again after the net had been removed. Bird concentrations in the surroundings were also monitored to assess the effect of the net. Bird numbers in the immediate vicinity of the landfill site were higher than those further away. When the net was installed, the bird concentrations adjacent to the landfill site decreased. Corvids were not affected by the net as they fed on covered waste which was available outside the net throughout the trial. This shows that bird problems on a landfill site are complex, requiring a comprehensive policy of bird control. A supporting bird scaring system and clear operating policy for sites near to airports would be required.

Optimal Segment Size for Fixed-sized Segment Protection in Wavelength-routed Optical Networks

Protecting a network against link failures is a major challenge faced by network operators. The protection scheme has to address two important objectives - fast recovery and minimizing the amount of backup resources needed. Every protection algorithm is a tradeoff between these two objectives. In this paper, we study the problem of segment protection. In particular, we investigate what is the optimal segment size that obtains the best tradeoff between the time taken for recovery and minimizing the bandwidth used by the backup segments. We focus on the uniform fixed-length segment protection method, where each primary path is divided into fixed-length segments, with the exception of the last segment in the path. We observe that the optimal segment size for a given network depends on several factors such as the topology and the ratio of the costs involved.

RP97-75 Fixed and Flexible Cash Rental Arrangements for Your Farm

The kind of rental arrangements for cropland vary widely in each locality and from one geographic area to another. What is desirable for one particular landlord/tenant relationship is not acceptable for others. The purpose of this publication is to help tenants and landlords develop fair cash-rent arrangements and assist them in making sound decisions based on a fair evaluation of resources. The first section addresses whether a fixed cash-rent lease arrangement should be used. Part II discusses how to develop a fair fixed cash rental rate, while Part III provides information on setting rent for other cropland, pasture, and buildings. Part IV outlines the advantages and disadvantages of flexible cash-leasing arrangements. Part V discusses the importance of developing a written lease agreement. A sample lease form also is included.

OPENING REMARKS - THIRD VERTEBRATE PEST CONFERENCE

To open this Third Vertebrate Pest Conference is a real privilege. It is a pleasure to welcome all of you in attendance, and I know there are others who would like to be meeting with us, but, for one reason or another cannot be. However, we can serve them by taking back the results of discussion and by making available the printed transactions of what is said here. It has been the interest and demand for the proceedings of the two previous conferen- ces which, along with personal contacts many of you have with the sponsoring committee, have gauged the need for continuing these meetings. The National Pest Control Association officers who printed the 1962 proceedings still are supplying copies of that conference. Two reprintings of the 1964 conference have been necessary and repeat orders from several universities indicate that those proceedings have become textbooks for special classes. When Dr. Howard mentioned in opening the first Conference in 1962 that publication of those papers would make a valuable handbook of animal control, he was prophetic, indeed. We are pleased that this has happened, but not surprised, since to many of us in this specialized field, the conferences have provided a unique opportunity to meet colleagues with similar interests, to exchange information on control techniques and to be informed by research workers of problem solving investigations as well as to hear of promising basic research. The development of research is a two-way street and we think these conferences also identify areas of inadequate knowledge, thereby stimulating needed research. We have represented here a number of types of specialists—animal ecologists, public health and transmissible disease experts, control methods specialists, public agency administration and enforcement staffs, agricultural extension people, manufacturing and sale industry representatives, commercial pest control operators, and others—and in addition to improving communications among these professional groups an equally important purpose of these conferences is to improve understanding between them and the general public. Within the term general public are many individuals and also organizations dedicated to appreciation and protection of certain animal forms or animal life in general. Proper concepts of vertebrate pest control do not conflict with such views. It is worth repeating for the record the definition of "vertebrate pest" which has been stated at our previous conferences. "A vertebrate pest is any native or introduced, wild or feral, non-human spe- cies of vertebrate animal that is currently troublesome locally or over a wide area to one or more persons either by being a general nuisance, a health hazard or by destroying food or natural resources. In other words, vertebrate pest status is not an inherent quality or fixed classification but is a circumstantial relationship to man's interests." I believe progress has been made in reducing the misunderstanding and emotion with which vertebrate pest control was formerly treated whenever a necessity for control was stated. If this is true, I likewise believe it is deserved, because control methods and programs have progressed. Control no longer refers only to population reductions by lethal means. We have learned something of alternate control approaches and the necessity for studying the total environment; where reduction of pest animal numbers is the required solution to a problem situation we have a wider choice of more selective, safe and efficient materials. Although increased attention has been given to control methods, research when we take a close look at the severity of animal damage to so many facets of our economy, particularly to agricultural production and public health, we realize it still is pitifully small and slow. The tremendous acceleration of the world's food and health requirements seems to demand expediting vertebrate pest control to effectively neutralize the enormous impact of animal damage to vital resources. The efforts we are making here at problem delineation, idea communication and exchange of methodology could well serve as both nucleus and rough model for a broader application elsewhere. I know we all hope this Third Conference will advance these general objectives, and I think there is no doubt of its value in increasing our own scope of information.