Aviation Ornithology Cell

Directorate of Flight Safety Meatball Dec 2008

Scientific bird management in Aerodromes

Sqn Ldr SS Mahesh
Deputy Director Flight Safety, Aviation Ornithology Cell, Directorate of Flight Safety, Air HQ, RK Puram, New Delhi 110 066
haddok.c@gmail.com

It is a common perception that birds can

be managed easily in airfields. But in reality, birds
are not easy to manage, as they keep adapting to
static scaring methods in a dynamic airfield
environment. To quote an example, it took nearly
30 years to significantly reduce the problem of
Canada Geese in the airfields of UK. This was
done by a simple solution of growing the grass to
18 inches. It may look trivial now, but remains as
a fact that Canada Geese are repelled by long
grass. Similarly in Indian context also there remains a gap between the efforts we are
putting in field and the efforts that we are supposed to put towards bird management.
Most importantly, our efforts need to be optimized for better results in the field
conditions. Hence, it becomes important for us to understand the concepts of bird hazard
management in the right perspective. Three things emerge. One, what all practices that
are currently in vogue in our country for managing birds? Second, what is the correct
approach that one should follow for managing birds? And finally, the necessity of
“species-specific and aerodrome-specific” management.

Current practices and measures in Indian aerodromes

We have general bird management measures

like installing reflective ribbons, mirror balls, gas
cannons, and scare crows on the sides of runway.
These devices are installed under the guise that they
scare all birds found in an aerodrome. All of them
are generalist methods with no specificity towards a
particular species. These gadgets remain effective
for a while and lose their sheen. This is because,
birds get used to them in a short period. These are
presently used in most military and civil
aerodromes.

Few bird management experts in India

Picture-1 European Roller perching on a propound that birds can be managed easily by
mannequin in Jodhpur
 2

destroying nests. Though this idea is appealing, various drawbacks emerge:

(a) It applies destructive mechanism and doesn’t explore the possibility of co-
existence. Some of the birds are protected under Indian law.
(b) It is difficult to locate nests.
(c) Management is restricted to breeding season only.
(d) Breeding areas may be located far away from the airfield.
(e) Finally, birds will always re-build their nest if destroyed.

Managing feeding areas of birds like garbage dumps, slaughterhouse wastes,

carcass dumps, and landfill facilities is good concept but, not all feeding areas of all
problematic birds can be managed easily. Moreover in India, gestation period for such
projects would vary anywhere from 20-25 years (and aerodrome management can not
afford to lose flying assets in the meantime).

Selective killing is sometimes

resorted to. This removes the problematic
birds from the scene immediately. This
method is effective only to a certain extent
because, the vacuum created by elimination
will soon be filled by other birds.

Under habitat modification, shrubs,

trees, and other vegetation harboring various
birds are removed. Unfortunately, at many
aerodromes vegetation is removed without
Picture-2 Greater Short-toed Larks in their understanding the target species. Due to this
newfound habitat, South India, Bidar there is a sudden increase in non-target
species beyond threshold level reaching
problematic status. For example in NW and South Indian aerodromes, the tree cover was
gradually lost resulting in expansion of grassland. This modified habitat has witnessed
unprecedented increase of Greater Short-toed Larks in the last few years. So, the option
of habitat management needs to be implemented with caution.

In the current Indian scenario, a lot of effort is put in field without targeting the
problematic bird species resulting in excess expenditure on resources. Also, various bird
management methods are implemented in the general belief that they will manage all
problematic birds. But in reality it is not.

The correct approach

Aerodromes should adopt a correct approach that helps to optimally utilize scarce
resources, shorten efforts in field, and yield satisfactory results. Following five pronged
strategies have been adapted and mastered at Aviation Ornithology Cell in our studies at
aerodromes.
 3

Step-1

The first step is to build checklist of birds occurring on an airfield. This is

important because ‘species spectrum’ of an aerodrome always correlates to number of
problematic species present. This forms the basis of further studies.

Step-2

While the checklist is being made, time series data with important parameters of
aerodrome dependency is collected. Trail data by designating transects for long term
monitoring is also collected.

Step-3

The problematic species are identified by analyzing bird data collected in an

airfield. Identification of problematic species is important because, not all the bird
species found in an airfield are
threat/important to flying. Many of the birds
would remain in the remote corner of
airfield never venturing out on runway. The
bird species are fitted into Risk Analysis
Table (RAT) for an airfield. The layout of
RAT is depicted in picture-3. The table is
divided into three color zones; red
indicating high-risk, yellow medium-risk
and green least-risk species.
RAT is unique for an airfield. This is
the most important aspect of RAT. An
example would be: Rock Pigeons are rated
as high-risk species in Jodhpur where
turbojets operate and the same bird is rated
as least-risk species in Yelahanka where Picture-3 Risk Analysis Table developed for
propeller driven aircraft operate. In the field, Gwalior by Aviation Ornithology Cell.
RAT changes over a period of time. This is
due to management practices implemented on that particular airfield. RAT tells us the
important bird species that need to be targeted first.

Step-4

After building RAT, risk species are studied in detail. One has to thoroughly
understand their aerodrome usage in terms of habitat, life cycle, and habits. In the
process, many weak links or clues emerge for designing specific management methods.
 4

Step-5

Based on the weak links and clues obtained after a detailed study, indigenous
methods suiting an airfield can be built for effective management of birds. This has to be
species-specific and aerodrome-specific designing because the method implemented for
one bird would not work for another. Hence the modules will be different for different
birds and aerodromes.

Case study: Gwalior aerodrome

Ornithology Cell studied

Picture-4 Parakeets commuting 12km from city to airfield
for feeding
Picture-5 Parakeets frequently cross between forest in
south to scrub in north for feeding. Their route is depicted
yellow.
Gwalior airfield in 2007. Rose-
ringed Parakeets are problematic in
the airfield. Couple of bird strikes
related to this bird has happened in
the past. Strike with a parakeet can
severely damage a turbojet engine.
The chances of strikes with
Parakeets were high as the birds
frequently crossed runway in flocks.
After the time series analysis,
Parakeets were assigned high-risk
status in RAT (see picture-3). Hence
the problem was studied in detail.
Roost of Parakeets at Hajira
was visited to estimate the
population. More than one lakh
Parakeets were found roosting on
more than 250 old trees. Of them,
approximately 4000 Parakeets
visited Gwalior airfield everyday for
feeding on fruiting trees (see Picture-
4).
Once settled in airfield, they
crossed runway to exploit the food
available on the other side. After
intensive studies, five different flight
routes of Parakeets across the
runway were identified. Of them,
one route between forests in the
south to scrubs in the north (with
34% Parakeet movement) was
forming a conflict zone where
fighters unstuck and attained 100m
height. Incidentally, Parakeets also
crossed at a height band of 50-200m.
 5

This clearly established the presence of a conflict zone, which needed to be managed (see
Picture-5, red color).
The attraction in the north when analyzed was found to have few arid fruit bearing
species like Ber, date palm etc. Few Peepal and Wild Fig trees also contributed to the
attraction. As a part of species-specific management, following were recommended:
1. Canopy engineering of few big trees like Peepal, Wild Fig etc whereby one
branch is pruned one month before flowering. This helped trees to produce more
branches while preventing it from flowering and fruiting. Big trees were not cut.
2. Selective removal of few Ber and scrub trees.
3. Not to bulldoze the entire area as it was harboring thousands of Indian Peafowls
and House Sparrows. These species though present in very large numbers, are not risk
species at Gwalior.
With this, the attraction at
scrubs in north of runway reduced
forcing Parakeets to visit trees in
the villages falling NW of airfield.
Parakeets continued to cross the
airfield at 50-200m height but the
flight route was shifted to west of
its earlier position (see Picture-6).
Aircraft continued to take-off
without any changes or
restrictions, gaining more height
over the new route of Parakeets.
The opposite runway is used very
little (less than a month in a year)
though the shifted route is away
from the touch down zone.

With this example, it can

Picture-6 Altered Parakeet crossing areas and shifted conflict
zone at Gwalior airfield be said that bird management is a
specialist job. The task is
enormous in our country as we need to upgrade our data collection systems, train
manpower and further streamlining of record of post-strike bird identification. This is
because; management strategies cannot be designed suiting a particular species without
knowing problematic birds. A new beginning has been now made and military aviation is
ushering into a new era of scientific bird management.