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.

Deer-Vehicle Crash Patterns Across Ecoregions in Michigan

Deer-vehicle collisions (DVCs) impact the economic and social well being of humans. We examined large-scale patterns behind DVCs across 3 ecoregions: Southern Lower Peninsula (SLP), Northern Lower Peninsula (NLP), and Upper Peninsula (UP) in Michigan. A 3 component conceptual model of DVCs with drivers, deer, and a landscape was the framework of analysis. The conceptual model was parameterized into a parsimonious mathematical model. The dependent variable was DVCs by county by ecoregion and the independent variables were percent forest cover, percent crop cover, mean annual vehicle miles traveled (VMT), and mean deer density index (DDI) by county. A discriminant function analysis of the 4 independent variables by counties by ecoregion indicated low misclassification, and provided support to the groupings by ecoregions. The global model and all sub-models were run for the 3 ecoregions and evaluated using information-theoretic approaches. Adjusted R2 values for the global model increased substantially from the SLP (0.21) to the NLP (0.54) to the UP (0.72). VMT and DDI were important variables across all 3 ecoregions. Percent crop cover played an important role in DVCs in the SLP and UP. The scale at which causal factors of DVCs operate appear to be finer in southern Michigan than in northern Michigan. Reduction of DVCs will likely occur only through a reduction in deer density, a reduction in traffic volume, or in modification of sitespecific factors, such as driver behavior, sight distance, highway features, or speed limits.

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.