Bird Deterrent Solutions for Crop Protection

Bird Deterrent Solutions for Crop Protection: Comparison

Please note this is a comparison between Version 2 by Peter Tang and Version 1 by Pedro D. Gaspar.

Weeds, pathogens, and animal pests are among the pests that pose a threat to the productivity of crops meant for human consumption. Bird-caused crop losses pose a serious and costly challenge for farmers.

birds
deterrents
agriculture
crops

1. Introduction

Pests, especially weeds, pathogens, and animal pests, pose a threat to the productivity of human-consumable crops. Bird-caused losses to fruit crops pose significant and expensive problems for farmers. Estimates on potential and actual losses caused by different bird species were discussed in a study carried out in Sweden between 2000 and 2015 ^[1]. During those years, there were 2194 complaints of crop damage, corresponding to a total loss of approximately 34,500 tons of various crops. The bird species that caused the most damage were, in order of the percentage of total losses from highest to lowest, the common crane (Grus grus) (33.7%), the barnacle goose (Branta leucopsis) (33.5%), the greylag goose (Anser anser) (26.6%), the bean goose (Anser fabalis fabalis) (2.6%), and the whooper swan (Cygnus cygnus) (2.2%). The remaining 1.4% of the total losses were caused by other birds.

Another study ^[2] aimed at finding out which bird species were directly related to crop damage. Visual damage was collected on 60 randomly selected plants: 12 at each cardinal point and 12 inland in New York State. It was focused on four different crops from 81 field locations: sweet cherry—23; blueberry—12; apple—24; and vine—22. Damages were estimated at 2.3% for apple fields, 3.6% for grapes, 22% for blueberries, and 26.8% for sweet cherries. In addition, surveys were also conducted on farmers with those crops via the Internet, mail, and telephone in New York, Michigan, Washington, Oregon, and California. New York farmers alone pointed out that, all together, they lose about $6.6 million per year and that 65.6% of them are taking measures to scare the birds away. Half of the farmers confirmed that birds are the biggest factor in crop loss.

A study conducted in Poland ^[3] concluded that, in the years 1974 and 1980, 22% and 16%, respectively, of cherry crops were destroyed by sturnids (Sturnidae). The same study also conducted another survey in four districts of Poland aimed at all crops. In Gdansk, 471 surveys were filled out, of which 27% stated with certainty that their fields were damaged by rooks (Corvus frugilegus), and 59% had suspicions that the damage that appeared on their crops was also caused by rooks. In Warsaw, 51% of 378 questionnaire respondents were certain that they had damage caused by rooks. In Kielee, 56% of 351 questionnaire respondents reported damage, and, in Wroclaw, 58% of 276 questionnaire respondents also confirmed damage caused by rooks. In that same survey, overall bird damage was also collected for four crops: wheat, oats, corn, and barley. In the four districts, corn losses ranged from 22% to 32%, wheat losses from 10% to 13%, barley losses from 3 to 18%, and oat losses from 8 to 15%.

2. Visual Deterrents

Visual deterrents present a visual stimulus to the birds that can trigger fear or curiosity. The dangerous feeling can be triggered by a real or simulated predator. In the case of real predators, this can lead to birds’ deaths. By contrast, there can be the use of something birds are not familiar with, such as scarecrows, dyes, lights, reflecting tape, optical gel, kites, balloons, or others. Some of these visual repellents can incorporate audio deterrents as well. A summary of the studies that have considered visual deterrents is provided in Table 1. Table 1.

Summary of the studies using visual deterrents.

	Author			Year			Bird Species			Bird Species		Area			Deterrent Technique			Success Rate				Negative Aspects			Conclusions

5. Exclusion Deterrents

These are devices or materials used to serve as a physical barrier. If access to a certain area, for example, where there is food or shelter, is restricted, the birds will leave the area and move on. There are also apparent barriers (i.e., there is no actual barrier).

Physical barriers are normally made up of wire mesh, polyethylene, or other synthetic materials and serve to prevent birds from approaching a specific area. They also serve to prevent them from nesting in these areas. The metal mesh can also be interconnected with electrified wires so that when birds land there they receive a harmless shock [93,94,95]^[90][91][92].

A summary of the studies that have considered exclusion deterrents is provided in Table 4.

Table 4.

Summary of the studies using exclusion deterrents.

	Author			Year			Bird Species			Area			Deterrent Technique			Success Rate		Negative		Aspects			Negative Aspects		Conclusions
	Conclusions

Table 5.

Summary of the studies using habitat modification methods.

	Author			Year		Area				Bird Species			Area		Deterrent Technique			Deterrent Technique		Success Rate				Success Rate		Negative Aspects			Conclusions
	Negative Aspects			Conclusions

Table 6.

Summary of the studies using removal deterrents.

	Author			Year			Bird Species			Area			Deterrent Technique			Success Rate			Negative Aspects			Conclusions

Table 7.

Summary of the studies using other deterrent techniques.

	Author			Year			Bird Species			Area			Deterrent Technique			Success Rate			Negative Aspects			Conclusions
[6]	^[4]
[47,48,49,50]	^[44]^[45]^[46]^[47]	1990			1939, 1968, 1986, 1989		Phalacrocoracidae				N/A		Aquaculture
[77,78]	^[75]^[76]	,95]	^[90]^[	1988, 1990		⁹¹	N/A		Fisheries operations		^]Scarecrows/Sirens		Residential area		^[	Chemical		⁹²^]	Shotguns and Rifles		Effective			Ineffective		N/A		N/A			N/A
[		Birds tend to not get used to it.
93,94
[98]	^[	1978, 1981, 1981		^95]	N/A			N/A		Sometimes the birds die.
[121]			Exclusion			N/A		^[	N/A		The more realistic the facial and body shape, the more effective scarecrows are likely to be.		They can be more detectable if they are painted in bright colors.
¹¹⁸		N/A			N/A		[7,8]	^[5]^[
^]	⁶^]
[18]	^[17	1995, 1997		^][	N/A		79		N/A		,80,81]	^[77]^[78	Scarecrows/		Lights/Sound			^]^[^79]		1976, 1984, 1988			N/A		[		Cities, agriculture, and airports		96]	^[93]		1936
[103]	^[100]1968			1968		N/A				Agelaius		N/A			Corn fields		Tall Grass			Traps		N/A			Ineffective		Long grass can attract rodents and birds of prey.					1976			Anseriformes			Agriculture		N/A		Prevents some birds from accessing food.		Due to the number of birds in the group, it is impossible to catch them all.
	Lure Area			N/A			N/A			Attracting and holding birds so that they will not go elsewhere.		Chemical
	[99]	^[96	[104,105,106]	^[101]^[102]^[103]
[122,123,124,125]	^[119]^[120]^[121]^[122]	1989			N/A			Agricultural fields		N/A			1974, 1987, 1990		Aequornithes		1975, 1974, 1978, 1981		N/A		Shotguns and Rifles		N/A			N/A		N/A				N/A		Traps				Magnetic Field, Microwaves		N/A		N/A		^]		1996			N/A		Birds tend to not get used to it.
Aquaculture ponds			Overhead Wires and Lines			Airport		Effective				“Poor grass”		N/A			Recommended as a method of deterring waterbirds from fishponds.
		N/A			N/A
	Ineffective		Effective		Sometimes the birds die.					N/A		N/A			N/A		N/A			Bird numbers on poor grass were as low or lower than on long grass.				N/A		N/A		[9,
[15,	[82]	^[80]	[54 34]	^[1410,11,12,13,]		^[5214]^]
[100]		1997
	N/A			^[7]]^[8][48]^[9]^[10]			1981		Sturnidae			Laboratory		N/A		^[97]^[¹¹^]^[^12]		1976, 1979, 1983, 1985, 1980, 1982					1996		Fish-rearing facilities		[93]	^[90]	1983, 1988
[126			N/A			1978		N/A		N/A			Butorides virescens		N/A		]	^[123]	Airports		N/A		Scarecrows		Tactile repellents		Ineffective			Birds get used to it easily.			Short time application, needs to be used with other techniques.
	Shotguns and Rifles			Ineffective			Sometimes the birds die.			Overhead Wires and Lines		May be effective					1997		Fish farm		Mowing at nighttime		N/A		Sturnus vulgaris			Traps		N/A		N/A			It may be possible to develop non-lethal, plant-based dermal repellent.
		Not Tested			N/A			N/A		Effective		N/A			Transportation costs		N/A		[5
		Mowing late in the day or overnight can reduce the attractiveness of this activities.		The birds were released 40 km from the point where they were trapped, and never came back.
		Magnetic Field				Ineffective			N/A			Only been proven to disorient birds and not to disperse them.		,15,16]	^[13]^[14]^[15]		1990, 1983, 1987
[51[23]	^[22]	[97]		N/A		,52]	^[[94]	[9,107,108]	^[7]
[127^[,128]		1998		N/A		^49]		N/A			N/A				1990
[101]	^[98] ^[124]^[50]		Aequornithes		Tactile repellents			¹⁰⁴^][^[105	1988, 1991		1997		^]	N/A		N/A			Airport		Overhead Wires and Lines		May be effective				Effective		N/A			N/A		Plant compounds that have been tested caused agitation and hyperactivity in the birds.
	The effectiveness of overhead wires or lines varies widely among species and circumstances.
	Mowing at nighttime			Effective			N/A		¹²⁵	1976, 1970, 1986			Larinae		^]	Airport			Live Ammunition			Ineffective			Birds habituate easily.				1971, 1973		Scarecrows			Ineffective			Phalacrocoracidae, Ardeidae			Fish farms			Shotguns and Rifles		Birds get used to it easily.			Relocate every 2–3 days.
	Ineffective			Sometimes the birds die.			Killing some birds only had temporary effects.		Mowing late in the day or overnight can reduce the attractiveness of this activities.			N/A			N/A			Microwaves			N/A			N/A		[17]	^[16]
	It was seen that in the short term it was effective		[23]
	N/A			^[22]	[23]	^[22]		[23]		1998		^[22]	[109,110,		^[106]
[129^[111,^107][112]	¹⁰⁸^]]		^[126]^[¹⁰⁹^]	1997			1998			Streptopelia orientalisN/A		1968, 1970, 1976, 1991			1985		N/A		Flight Cage			1998		Scarecrows			Effective			N/A		N/A		Airport		N/A			Behavioral Repellents			N/A			Fruit trees
[102]				Can cause disorientation and erratic behavior.			N/A
^[99]		1988			Laridae			Landfill		Overhead Wires and Lines			N/A		Changing water/feeding zones		Effective				Effective		High costs and difficult application in large areas.			It solves the problem of the presence of birds in a permanent way.
		N/A		Surfactants			N/A			Pyrotechnics		Better than stuffed crows or kites.
		Effective				N/A		N/A			By removing the water/food, the area is no longer attractive to birds.			Microwaves		N/A		Birds get used to it easily.				N/A		Only used in an initial approach.			N/A
	N/A			N/A			N/A		[18]	^[17]
[25]	^[24]	[15,	[113 83,84]	^[14]	1989		^[⁸¹	[23^][82]		]	^[22]		^[110]	1976		1983, 1983, 1990		Turdus merula, Anas platyrhynchos, Anser anser			^]	N/A		4–6 acres sunflower fields				1998		Scarecrows/		Propane cannon			N/A		Effective			N/A		N/A			Behavioral Repellents			N/A		Effective		N/A	Ducks and geese spook more easily than blackbirds.	If the dose is too high, it can lead to the bird’s death.		Unaffected birds from the flock eventually escape due to the warning signal from the flock mate.

[130,131]	^[127]^[	Sanitary landfill
	¹²⁸^]	1997			1965, 1969		Turdus merula, Sturnidae		Flares				N/A		Foam				Surfactants		May be effective		May be effective		Effective		Fire hazard				Laridae, Melopsittacus undulatus, Gallus gallus domesticus, Columbidae			38.2 million blackbirds and starlings were killed between 1974–1992.		Laboratory		Its effectiveness would be reduced in rainy or windy weather.		In conjunction with other techniques, it can help to disperse the birds in a certain direction.			It could be used to cover small areas that are particularly attractive to birds.			PA-14 did solve local roost problems.
	Microwaves			N/A			The radiation levels are considerably higher than the levels that are safe for humans.			N/A		[19]	^[18]
[53,54,55]	^[51]^[52]^[	[15,83⁵³,84,85,86,87]	^[14]^[81]^][82]^[83]^[84]^[85
[23^]		]		[		1983, 1983, 1990, 1970, 1973, 1970		^[107]		^[104]	1974				Sturnidae, Turdus merula, Passeriformes, Laridae, Corvus Corax		²²		1976			Laridae
[76,132,133,134,135,136]	^[		Air bases		^]	Airbase		Behavioral Repellents			⁷⁴	Falconry, Pyrotechnics			Effective		^]^[129]^[130]^[131]^[132]^[133	1980, 1981, 1986		Charadriiformes			Fishponds			N/A		Scarecrows			Effective			N/A			^]	1998			1996, 1946, 1949, 1954, 1971, 1972		Ineffective				N/A		Landfill sites			N/A	Microwaves	N/A	N/A		Lakes, ponds…	Bird Balls	May be effective	Pistols	N/A	Effective	N/A	N/A	Birds get used to it after two hours.
	It was necessary to replace two falcons each year.		Small area and short-term usage.
		Are very easy to install and require significantly less maintenance.				N/A		Four goshawks were successfully used at an airbase in Holland to clear the runways from gulls.
	N/A			Few studies have reported that radars have caused behavioral changes in flying birds.		[20]	^[19]	[23]		1986			N/A
[56]	^[54] ^[22		Various crops			^]	[114]	^[111]
[137,138]	^[134	1991		^]1998	Branta canadensis			Urban parks	^[	Branta Canadensis, Laridae, Sturnidae			Laboratory, sanitary landfill, airportsReflective Tape			Screamer shells		Effective			Very Effective	1970		ReJeX-iT		May interfere with walking on the terrain.			Tape 0.025 mm thick and 11 mm wide. High winds may increase efficiency.
	N/A			¹³⁵	Laridae			Airbase			Falconry		Effective			N/A				Effective		^]	N/A		1972, 1965		Long-term effects, the concentration of geese in the area was reduced by 88%.			Sturnidae, Anas platyrhynchos, Laridae		ReJeX-iT can be effective at deterring birds in certain situations, but the doses used in some studies were not effective.
	Laboratory		Gulls showed no signs of habituating to the goshawks during the two-year study.
		Laser			N/A			Could cause hemorrhage in birds’ eyes.			Not recommended		[21]	^[20]
[25]	^[24]	[89]	^[86	1986		^]	[115]	^[112	1992		^]
[139]	^[136]	1976		1996		Turdus merula			N/A		Crops			Reflective Tape			Effective				N/A		May interfere with walking on the terrain.		Mortars		If the tape gets twisted, it can be less effective.			Tape 3 m apart from each other at 0.5 to 1 m from the ground.
		1980		Anas platyrhynchos, Branta Canadensis		May be effective			Laridae		Laboratory			Dimethyl and Methyl anthranilate		Highly skilled operator. Safety hazard; there have been several accidents related to the use of mortars.		Very Effective			N/A		If they produce a loud bang, they are more effective at daytime and in a larger area than other pyrotechnic devices.			Laridae		When subjected only treated grain, both ducks and geese reduced their food intake.
	Military Airfield			Falconry				Landfill		N/A	[22]	^[21]
		N/A			Laser			Not recommend as a routine method for bird control at civil airfields.		Ineffective
	N/A			Not recommended		[57,58]	^[55]	[90		1990		]	^[87^[	Anser anser		^]⁵⁶	20.2 hectares of winter wheat		^]	Reflective Tape				[116]		1974, 1990		1995		Effective			May interfere with walking on the terrain if the tape gets twisted; it can be less effective.			20 mm thick red fluorescent tape. The lines were tied at 40 to 60 m between rows of wheat.
	N/A		Larus delawarensis, Larus argentatos, Anas platyrhynchos		N/A			^[	Pools of water in fields		Gas cannon			^113]	Methyl anthranilate		N/A			1978		Effective			N/A				Laridae			Airfields		N/A			The noise of the explosion resembles or is louder than that of a 12-gauge shotgun.			Falconry, Pyrotechnics, Model Gulls			N/A		N/A	[23]	^[22]		1998			Gas cannon and others

	N/A			N/A		[54,55]	^[52]^[53]	[91]	^[88]
[27,28,29]	^[26]^[27]^[28]	1981, 1986		N/A		1996		N/A		Vineyards			Branta Canadensis		Areas up to 4 ha		Hawk Kites and Balloons			Ineffective					1985, 1986, 1987		N/A		Branta Canadensis			Airfields		Gas cannon		Methyl anthranilate		Birds get used to it easily.			Short-term utilization.
		Effective			Falconry		Ineffective		N/A			N/A		Proven to be effective deterrents for areas up to 4 ha in the cases of nongame species.				Ineffective		Product concentration used in		N/A		[90]^[87] did not repelled this species.
	N/A		[24]	^[23]		1983
[59,60,61]	^[57]^[58]^[59]		N/A			Agricultural			Dead Bird Models			[92]	^[	1984, 1990, 1990		N/A	⁸⁹	Laridae		^]
[117]		1993			N/A		Landfill				Ponds at airports		Effective		N/A			N/A		N/A
	^[		ReJeX-iT		Gas cannons, in combination with other dispersal methods such as pyrotechnics, have been found to reduce numbers of gulls.			Effective			N/A			Bird numbers decreased in treated ponds.		[15,25,26]	^[14]^[24]^[25
[15,25^]		]	^[14]^[24]	1983, 1976, 1980			1983, 1976		N/A			N/A		Airports			Various Crops		Dead Bird Models				Av-alarm		N/A				Effective		N/A			N/A		N/A
		AV-alarms appear to have been used successfully to reduce numbers of small birds.		[27,28,29,30]	^[26]^[27]^[28]^[29]
[62]	^[60]	1985, 1986, 1987, 1990				1985		Larus delawarensis			Sturnus vulgaris, Passer melanurus, Ploceus velatus		City			Grape culture		Dead Bird Models/Pyrotechnics/Falconry			Av-alarm		Effective				Effective		N/A				N/A		The use of this method is recommended, but the positive results are partly due to the use of pyrotechnic material.
	Can be effective in reducing the damage to grapes.		[23]	^[22]		1984			N/A			Agriculture			Aircraft			N/A			Dangerous to the tripulants.			Not		recommended
[63]	^[61]		1970			Sturnidae			Blueberry crops			Av-alarm and others			Effective			N/A			It worked better in conjunction with shotguns or propane cannons.		[15,31,33]	^[14]^[30]^[31

6. Habitat Modification

Habitat modification is the removal or alteration of the natural characteristics of a site. It may include trees and shrubs, the removal of ponds, planting in areas without flora, planting crops that are not attractive to birds, such as tall grass, eliminating possible nesting areas, the use of exclusion methods barriers, and even chemical agents used in the birds’ natural foods.

A summary of the studies that have considered habitat modification methods is provided in Table 5

7. Removal Deterrents

This method consists of catching birds and releasing them away or eliminating them, either with traps, poison, or the use of lethal ammunition. It is a method that requires skills to be used, because it may use materials that can be lethal to humans as well. Using lethal methods would only work in the short term and only reduce the bird’s local population.

A summary of the studies that have considered removal deterrents is provided in Table 6.

¹¹⁴

1983

Columba palumbus

Brassica fields

Falconry

Ineffective

N/A

After repeated attacks by the goshawk, the pigeons usually resettled and continued to feed.

[118]

^[115]

1978

Laridae

Landfill

Falconry

Very effective

Some birds died

The effectiveness seemed to derive from the cumulative effects of several bird control episodes.

[23,119,120]

^[22]^[116]^[117]

1998, 1965, 1980

[64]

^[62]

1983, 1967, 1990

1978

N/A

Telluraves

Farms/Airports

Cornfields

RC Aircraft

Av-alarm and gas cannon

N/A

Effective

N/A

Better results were obtained by combining both methods.

[32,35]

^[32]^[33]

[65]

^[63

1975, 1981

Sturnidae, Charadriinae, Anser anser, Anas platyrhynchos

Airport, City

RC Aircraft

1983

Very effective

N/A

Requires a highly skilled operator.

Birds may habituate slowly to a model aircraft that actively hazes them, especially if it has a falcon shape.

Av-alarm

Ineffective

N/A

AV-alarm was not as effective as distress calls in repelling birds.

[37]

^[34]

[66,67]

^[64]

1987

Sturnidae

⁶⁵

Roost

Lights/Predator Model

1990, 1990

N/A

Effective

Av-alarm

N/A

Ineffective

N/A

Birds accustomate to this sound.

[25]

^[24]

[68]

^[66]

1976

1979

Anas platyrhynchos

Grain Fields

Sturnidae

Searchlights

Effective

N/A

Av-alarm

May attract birds if it is nighttime or if the weather is cloudy or foggy.

Ineffective

N/A

It is recommended in certain weather conditions.

Starlings only increased slightly the heart rate when they were exposed to AV-alarm.

[38]

^[35]

1975

[69

Vanellinae, Larinae

Airport

Lights

]

Effective

N/A

[39]

^[36]

1982

N/A

Airport

Lights

Ineffective

N/A

Whether the plane had its lights on or not, the results were the same.

Limited effectiveness

Ineffective to gulls (Larinae), blackbirds (Turdus merula), and starlings (Sturnidae).

50–60% success rate.

[13]

^[11]

1980

Anseriformes

Oil Spill

Lights

Ineffective

N/A

3. Auditory Deterrents

These are methods that use auditory techniques to deter birds. Most auditory deterrents also have a visual component. A summary of the studies that have considered auditory deterrents is provided in Table 2.

Table 2.

Summary of the studies using auditory deterrents.

	Author			Year


Laridae


N/A


Falconry

	N/A			Falcons cannot fly with bad weather.			Dealing with gulls with bad weather is a problem.


^[
⁶⁷
^]
^[^68]		1973, No date			Aequornithes			Aquatic terrain			Av-alarm			May be effective		N/A			Insufficient details to assess changes in bird numbers.
[71,72]	^[69]^[70]		1973, 1968			Laridae			Airport			Predator Sounds			Effective		N/A			The playback of a Peregrine Falcon call was effective at dispersing gulls.
[40]	^[37]		1986			Corvus Corax, Pica, Cyanocitta cristata
[73]	^[71]		1957			Anas platyrhynchos		Airport				Ponds		Lights			High-intensity Sounds		Ineffective			Effective		N/A			Can cause hearing damage and other human health effects.		Birds were more frightened by the plane than by the lights.
	Some birds vacate the pond after two or three days.		[41]	^[38]		1992
[74]	^[72]		Falco sparverius, Leucophaeus atricilla				1986			Laridae		N/A			N/A	Lights				Ultrasounds		May be effective				Ineffective		N/A			N/A		Lights that flash faster increase the birds’ heart rate more in the short term, but lights that flash more slowly manage to keep the average heart rate higher.
		Found no evidence that gulls either heard or reacted to ultrasounds.		[42]	^[39]		1976
[75]	^[73]			1992		N/A			N/A		N/A			Lights		N/A			N/A			Ultrasounds			Ineffective		N/A			Frequencies should not exceed 100 Hz.
	N/A			Bird population did not decrease in more than 5%.		[43,44]	^[40]^[41]
[76]	^[74]	1976, 1976				1996		Larinae, Sturnidae, Columba livia				N/A		N/A		N/A		Lights			Effective			No repellant effect was observed when the strobe light flashed at higher frequencies to 60 Hz.			Gulls delayed approaching a feeding point by 30 to 45 min.
	Infrasounds			Ineffective			N/A			Birds do not associate these sounds with danger.		[45]	^[42]		1993		Falco sparverius, Leucophaeus atricilla			Laboratory			Lights			Ineffective			N/A			Birds did become attentive to the lights, but it did not necessarily mean that it frightened them away.
[15,46]	^[14]^[43]		1983, 1977			Anseriformes, Charadriiformes, Passer, Larinae, Turdus merula, Sturnidae			Oil Spill			Lights

4. Chemical Deterrents

Chemical aversion techniques have been used in a variety of contexts, from residential areas [77,78]^[75][76] and cities, to agriculture and airports [79,80,81]^[77][78][79]. Birds do not tend to get used to these types of techniques.

A summary of the studies that have considered chemical deterrents is provided in Table 3.

Table 3.

Summary of the studies using chemical deterrents.

	Author			Year			Bird Species			Area			Deterrent Technique			Success Rate

8. Other Deterrent Techniques

A summary of the studies that have considered other deterrent techniques is provided in Table 7.

References

Montràs-Janer, T.; Knape, J.; Nilsson, L.; Tombre, I.; Pärt, T.; Månsson, J. Relating National Levels of Crop Damage to the Abundance of Large Grazing Birds: Implications for Management. J. Appl. Ecol. 2019, 56, 2286–2297.
Henrichs, H.M.; Boulanger, J.R.; Curtis, P.D. Limiting Bird Damage to Fruit Crops in New York: Damage Assessments and Potential Management Strategies for the FutureWildlife Damage Management. In Proceedings of the Wildlife Damage Management, Clemson, SC, USA, 25–28 March 2013; p. 180.
Pinowski, J.; Zając, Z.R. Damage to Crops Caused by Bird in Central Europe. In Granivorous Birds in the Agricultural Landscape; PWN: Warszawa, Poland, 1990; pp. 333–345.
Littauer, G. Avian Predators. Frightening Techniques for Reducing Bird Damage at Aquaculture Facilities; Southern Regional Aquaculture Center: Uvalde, TX, USA, 1990; Volume 401.
Stickley, A.R.; Mott, D.F.; King, J.O. Short-Term Effects of an Inflatable Effigy on Cormorants at Catfish Farms. Wildl. Soc. Bull. 1995.
Andelt, W.F.; Woolley, T.P.; Hopper, S.N. Effectiveness of Barriers, Pyrotechnics, Flashing Lights, and Scarey Man for Deterring Heron Predation on Fish. Wildl. Soc. Bull. 1997, 25, 686–694.
Blokpoel, H. Bird Hazards to Aircraft; Clarke, Irwin and Company Limited: Toronto, ON, Canada, 1976; Volume 326.
Conover, M.R. Response of Birds to Raptor Models. In Proceedings of the Bird Control Seminar 8, Bowling Green, OH, USA, 30 October–1 November 1979; pp. 16–24.
Conover, M.R. Pole-Bound Hawk-Kites Failed to Protect Maturing Cornfields from Blackbird Damage. In Proceedings of the Bird Control Seminar 9, Bowling Green, OH, USA, 4–6 October 1983; pp. 85–90.
Conover, M.R. Protecting Vegetables from Crows Using an Animated Crow-Killing Owl Model. J. Wildl. Manag. 1985, 49, 643.
Boag, D.A.; Lewin, V. Effectiveness of Three Waterfowl Deterrents on Natural and Polluted Ponds. J. Wildl. Manag. 1980, 44, 145–154.
Hothem, R.L.; DeHaven, R.W. Raptor-Mimicking Kites for Reducing Bird Damage to Wine Grapes. In Proceedings of the Vertebrate Pest Conference 10, Monterey, CA, USA, 23–25 February 1982; pp. 171–178.
Hussain, I. Trapping, Netting and Scaring Techniques for Bird Control; Brooks, J.E., Ahmad, E., Hussain, I., Eds.; Pakistan Agricultural Research Council: Islamabad, Pakistan, 1990; pp. 187–191.
DeFusco, R.P.; Nagy, J.G. Frightening Devices for Airfield Bird Control. Ph.D. Thesis, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO, USA, 1983; p. 274.
LGL Limited. Handbook of Wildlife Control Devices and Chemicals; LGL Ltd.: Ottawa, ON, Canada, 1987; p. 102.
Nakamura, K. Estimation of Effective Area of Bird Scarers. J. Wildl. Manag. 1997, 61, 925.
Nomsen, D.E. Preventing Waterfowl Crop Damage; Knittle, C., Parker, R.D., Eds.; United States Fish Wildlife Service: Washington, DC, USA, 1989.
Naggiar, M. Man vs. Birds; Florida Wildlife: Melbourne, FL, USA, 1974.
Bruggers, R.L.; Brooks, J.E.; Dolbeer, R.A.; Woronecki, P.P.; Pandit, R.K.; Tarimo, T.; Hoque, M. Responses of Pest Birds to Reflecting Tape in Agriculture. Wildl. Soc. Bull. 1986, 14, 161–170.
Dolbeer, R.A.; Woronecki, P.P.; Bruggers, R.L. Reflecting Tapes Repel Blackbirds from Millet, Sunflowers, and Sweet Corn. Wildl. Soc. Bull. 1986, 14, 418–425.
Summers, R.W.; Hillman, G. Scaring Brent Geese Branta Bernicla from Fields of Winter Wheat with Tape. Crop. Prot. 1990, 9, 459–462.
Transport Canada, Evaluation of the Efficacy of Products and Techniques for Airport Bird Control. Available online: https://tc.canada.ca/en/aviation/publications/evaluation-efficacy-products-techniques-airport-bird-control-03-1998-tp-13029 (accessed on 20 December 2022).
Naef-Daenzer, L. Scaring of Carrion Crows (Corvus Corone Corone) by Species-Specific Distress Calls and Suspended Bodies of Dead Crows. In Proceedings of the Bird Control Seminar, Bowling Green, OH, USA, 4–6 October 1983; pp. 91–95.
Koski, W.R.; Richardson, W.J. Review of Waterbird Deterrent and Dispersal Systems for Oil Spills; Association Conservation Canada Environment, PACE: Toronto, ON, Canada, 1976.
Inglis, I.R. Visual Bird Scarers: An Ethological Approach; Wright, E.N., Inglis, I.R., Feare, C.J., Eds.; British Crop Protection Council: Croydon, UK, 1980; pp. 161–170.
Watermann, U. Ring-Billed Gull Control Programme at Tommy Thompson Park; Report by U.W. Enterprises for Metropolitan Toronto and Region Conservation Authority: Downsview, ON, Canada, 1985; p. 24.
Watermann, U. Ring-Billed Gull Control Programme at Tommy Thompson Park; Report by U.W. Enterprises for Metropolitan Toronto and Region Conservation Authority: Downsview, ON, Canada, 1986; p. 26.
Watermann, U. Ring-Billed Gull Control Programme at Tommy Thompson Park; Report by U.W. Enterprises for Metropolitan Toronto and Region Conservation Authority: Downsview, ON, Canada, 1987; p. 22.
Watermann, U.; Cunningham, G. Ring-Billed Gull Control Programme, Tommy Thompson Park; Bird Control International: Milton, ON, Canada, 1990.
Saul, E.K. Birds and Aircraft: A Problem at Auckland’s New International Airport. J. R. Aeronaut. Soc. 1967, 71, 366–376.
Parsons, J.L.; Hiscock, E.H.J.; Hicklin, P.W. Reduction of Losses of Cultured Mussels to Sea Ducks; Economic Regional Development Agreement Report No. 17; Nova Scotia Department of Fisheries, Industrial Development Division: Halifax, NS, Canada, 1990; p. 69.
Ward, J.G. Use of a Falcon-Shaped Model Aircraft to Disperse Birds; LGL Ltd.: Ottawa, ON, Canada, 1975.
Solman, V.E.F. Birds and Aviation. Env. Conserv. 1981, 8, 45–51.
Krzysik, A.J. A Review of Bird Pests and Their Management; Technical Report; U.S. Army Construction Engineering Research Laboratory: Champaign, IL, USA, 1987; p. 114.
Lawrence, J.H., Jr.; Bauer, A.B.; Childers, C.A.; Coker, M.J.; Eng, R.K.; Kerker, R.; Mas, G.E.; Naish, J.M.; Potter, J.G.; Rhodes, G.F.; et al. Bird Strike Alleviation Techniques; McDonnell Douglas Corp: Columbus, OH, USA, 1975; Volume 1.
Zur, B.J. Bird Strike Study; Air Transport World. 1982. Available online: https://tc.canada.ca/en/aviation/publications/evaluation-efficacy-products-techniques-airport-bird-control-03-1998-tp-13029/literature-cited (accessed on 15 December 2022).
Briot, J.L. Last French Experiments Concerning Bird-Strike Hazards Reduction. In Proceedings of the Bird Strike Committee Europe 18, Copenhagen, Denmark, 26–30 May 1986; pp. 202–208.
Bahr, J.; Erwin, R.; Green, J.; Buckingham, J.; Peel, H. A Laboratory Assessment of Bird Responses to an Experimental Strobe Light Deterrent; The Delta Environmental Management Group Ltd. and Southwest Research Institute: Sidney, BC, Canada, 1992.
Laty, M. Startling of Birds by Light: Experimental Measures, Current Research. In Proceedings of the Bird Strike Committee Europe 11, London, UK, 13–17 May 1976.
Belton, P. Effects of Interrupted Light on Birds; Simon Fraser University: Burnaby, Canada, 1976.
Solman, V.E.F. Aircraft and Birds. In Proceedings of the Bird Control Seminar 7; National Research Council: Ottawa, ON, Canada, 1976; pp. 83–88.
Green, J.; Bahr, J.; Erwin, R.; Buckinham, J.; Peel, H. Reduction of Bird Hazards to Aircraft: Research and Development of Strobe Light Technology as a Bird Deterrent; San Antonio-Texas: Vancouver, BC, USA, 1993.
United States Department of the Interior Methods for Dispersing Birds. Part IX in Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Plan; United States Department of the Interior Methods for Dispersing Birds: Atlanta, GA, USA, 1977; pp. 48–58.
Lagler, K.F. The Control of Fish Predators at Hatcheries and Rearing Stations. J. Wildl. Manag. 1939, 3, 169.
Davidson, P.E. The Oystercatcher—A Pest of Shellfisheries. In The Problems of Birds As Pests; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 1968; pp. 141–155.
Anderson, J.M. Merganser Predation and Its Impact on Atlantic Salmon Stocks in the Restigouche River System; Atlantic Salmon Federation: St. Andrews, UK, 1986.
The Nature Conservancy Council. Fishfarming and the Safeguard of the Natural Marine Environment of Scotland; The Nature Conservancy Council: Edinburgh, UK, 1989.
BSCE “The Green Booklet”. Some Measures Used in Different Countries for Reduction of Bird Strike Risk around Airports; Aerodrome Working Group, Bird Strike Committee Europe: Helsinki, Finland, 1988; p. 73.
EIFAC—European Inland Fisheries Advisory Commission. Working Party on Prevention and Control of Bird Predation in Aquaculture and Fisheries Operations. 1988. Available online: https://tc.canada.ca/en/aviation/publications/evaluation-efficacy-products-techniques-airport-bird-control-03-1998-tp-13029/literature-cited (accessed on 15 December 2022).
Coniff, R. Why Catfish Farmers Want to Throttle the Crow of the Sea. Smithson. J. 1991, 22, 44–45.
Mott, D.F. Dispersing Blackbirds and Starlings from Objectionable Roost Sites. In Proceedings of the Vertebrate Pest Conference 9, Sacramento, CA, USA, 4–6 March 1980; pp. 38–42.
Salmon, T.P.; Conte, F.S. Control of Bird Damage at Aquaculture Facilities; United States Fish Wildlife Service, and Wildlife Management Leaflet: Atlanta, GA, USA, 1981; Volume 475.
Salmon, T.P.; Conte, F.S.; Gorenzel, W.P. Bird Damage at Aquaculture Facilities; Institute of Agriculture and Natural Resources, University of Nebraska: Lincoln, UK, 1986.
Aguilera, E.; Knight, R.L.; Cummings, J.L. An Evaluation of 2 Hazing Methods for Urban Canada Geese. Wildl. Soc. Bull. 1991, 19, 32–35.
Feare, C.J. Ecological Studies of the Rook (Corvus Frugilegus L.) in North-East Scotland. Damage and Its Control. J. Appl. Ecol. 1974, 11, 897.
Nelson, P. Serious Pests Need Serious Treatment. Orchard. N. Z. 1990, 63, 25–27.
Risley, C.; Blokpoel, H. Evaluation of Effectiveness of Bird-Scaring Operations at a Sanitary Landfill Site near CFB Trenton, Ontario, Canada. In Proceedings of the Wildlife Hazards to Aircraft Conference and Training Workshop, Charleston, SC, USA, 22–25 May 1984; pp. 265–273.
Miller, G.W.; Davis, R.A. Independent Monitoring of the 1990 Gull Control Program at Britannia Sanitary Landfill Site; LGL Ltd.: King City, CA, USA, 1990.
Miller, G.W.; Davis, R.A. Monitoring of a Gull Control Program at Britannia Sanitary Landfill Site: Autumn 1989; LGL Ltd.: King City, CA, USA, 1990.
Jarvis, M.J.F. Problem Birds in Vineyards. Deciduous Fruit Grow. 1985, 35, 132–136.
Nelson, J.W. Bird Control in Cultivated Blueberries. In Proceedings of the Bird Control Seminar 5; Virginia Department of Agriculture And Commerce: Richmond, VA, USA, 1970; pp. 98–100.
Potvin, N.; Bergeron, J.-M.; Genest, J. Comparaison de Méthodes de Répression d’oiseaux s’attaquant Au Maïs Fourrager. Can. J. Zool. 1978, 56, 40–47.
Booth, T.W. Bird Dispersal Techniques; Institute of Agriculture and Natural Resources, University of Nebraska: Lincoln, NE, USA, 1983.
Bomford, M.; O’Brien, P.H. Sonic Deterrents in Animal Damage Control: A Review of Device Tests and Effectiveness. Wildl. Soc. Bull. 1990, 18, 411–412.
Devenport, E.C. Wild Bird Control. County Program Addresses Health and Nuisance Problems. Environ. Health 1990, 53, 25–27.
Thompson, R.D.; Johns, B.E.; Grant, C.V. Cardiac and Operant Behavior Response of Starlings (Sturnus Vulgaris) to Distress and Alarm Sounds. In Proceedings of the Bird Control Seminar. 1979, pp. 119–124. Available online: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1016&context=icwdmbirdcontrol (accessed on 15 December 2022).
Crummett, J.G. A Study of Bird Repelling Techniques for Use during Oil Spills; University of Nebraska-Lincoln: Washington, DC, USA, 1973.
Crummett, J.G. Bird Dispersal Techniques for Use in Oil Spills; University of Nebraska-Lincoln: Washington, DC, USA, 1973.
Gunn, W.W.H. Experimental Research on the Use of Sound to Disperse Dunlin Sandpipers. 1973. Available online: https://www.arlis.org/docs/vol1/I/30850927.pdf (accessed on 16 December 2022).
Thompson, R.D.; Grant, C.V.; Pearson, E.W.; Corner, G.W. Differential Heart Rate Response of Starlings to Sound Stimuli of Biological Origin. J. Wildl. Manag. 1968, 32, 888.
Thiessen, G.J.; Shaw, E.A.G.; Harris, R.D.; Gollop, J.B.; Webster, H.R. Acoustic Irritation Threshold of Peking Ducks and Other Domestic and Wild Fowl. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 1957, 29, 1301–1306.
Beuter, K.J.; Weiss, R. Properties of the Auditory System in Birds and the Effectiveness of Acoustic Scaring Signals. In Proceedings of the Bird Strike Committee Europe, Copenhagen, Denmark, 26–30 May 1986; pp. 60–73.
Hamershock, D.M. Ultrasonics as a Method of Bird Control; Wright Lab Wright-Patterson AFB: Dayton, OH, USA, 1992.
Short, J.J.; Kelley, M.E.; McKeeman, J. Recent Research into Reducing Birdstrike Hazards. In Proceedings of the International Bird Strike Committee Proceedings and Papers 23, London, UK, 24–28 May 1996; pp. 381–407.
Fitzwater, W.D. Solutions to Urban Bird Problems. In Proceedings of the Vertebrate Pest Conference 13. 1988, pp. 254–259. Available online: https://www.arlis.org/docs/vol1/I/30850927.pdf (accessed on 16 December 2022).
Woronecki, P.P.; Dolbeer, R.A.; Seamans, T.W. Use of Alpha-Chloralose to Remove Waterfowl from Nuisance and Damage Situations. In Proceedings of the Vertebrate Pest Conference 14. 1990, pp. 343–349. Available online: https://escholarship.org/uc/item/9g52w6gd (accessed on 16 December 2022).
Clark, D.O. An Overview of Depredating Bird Damage Control in California. In Proceedings of the—Bird Control Seminar 7; 1976; pp. 21–27. Available online: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/icwdmbirdcontrol/47/ (accessed on 25 December 2022).
Conover, M.R. Comparative Effectiveness of Avitrol, Exploders, and Hawk-Kites in Reducing Blackbird Damage to Corn. J. Wildl. Manag. 1984, 48, 109.
Knittle, C.E.; Cummings, J.L.; Linz, G.M.; Besser, J.F. An Evaluation of Modified 4-Aminopyridine Baits for Protecting Sunflower from Blackbird Damage. In Proceedings of the Vertebrate Pest Conference 13. 1988, pp. 248–253. Available online: https://agris.fao.org/agris-search/search.do?recordID=US8924811 (accessed on 25 December 2022).
Clark, L. Dermal Contact Repellents for Starlings: Foot Exposure to Natural Plant Products. J. Wildl. Manag. 1997, 61, 1352.
White, T.M.; Weintraub, R. A Technique for Reduction and Control of Herring Gulls at a Sanitary Landfill; Waste Age, University of California: Davis, CA, USA, 1983; pp. 66–67.
Brooks, J.E.; Hussain, I. Chemicals for Bird Control; PARC: Islamabad, Pakistan, 1990.
Caldara, J.D. The Birds as a Menace to Flight Safety. In Proceedings of the World Conference on Bird Hazards to Aircraft, Kingston, ON, Canada, 2–5 September 1970.
Wooten, R.C., Jr.; Meyer, G.E.; Sobieralski, R.J. Gulls and USAF Aircraft Hazards; National Technical Information Service United States Department of Commerce: Alexandria, VA, USA, 1973. Available online: https://nimby.ca/PDFs/TP13029B.pdf (accessed on 25 December 2022).
Seaman, E.A. U.S. Air Force Problems in Bird/Aircraft Strikes. In Proceedings of the World Conference on Bird Hazards; National Reserch Council Canada: Ottawa, ON, Canada, 1970; pp. 87–90.
Cummings, J.L.; Otis, D.L.; Davis, J.E. Dimethyl and Methyl Anthranilate and Methiocarb Deter Feeding in Captive Canada Geese and Mallards. J. Wildl. Manag. 1992, 56, 349.
Belant, J.L.; Gabrey, S.W.; Dolbeer, R.A.; Seamans, T.W. Methyl Anthranilate Formulations Repel Gulls and Mallards from Water. Crop Prot. 1995, 14, 171–175.
Belant, J.L.; Seamans, T.W.; Tyson, L.A.; Ickes, S.K. Repellency of Methyl Anthranilate to Pre-Exposed and Naive Canada Geese. J. Wildl. Manag. 1996, 60, 923.
Dolbeer, R.A.; Belant, J.L.; Clark, L. Methyl Anthranilate Formulations to Repel Birds from Water at Airports and Food at Landfills. In Proceedings of the Great Plains Wildlife Damage Control Conference 11. 1993, pp. 42–53. Available online: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1328&context=gpwdcwp (accessed on 25 December 2022).
Mott, D.F. Control of Wading Bird Predation at Fish-Rearing Facilities; National Audubon Society: New York, NY, USA, 1978; pp. 131–132.
Meyer, J. Fish Farmer 4; 1981; pp. 23–26. Available online: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1981/1653/contents/made (accessed on 25 December 2022).
Ueckermann, E.; Spittler, H.; Graumann, F. Technische Maßnahmen Zur Abwehr Des Graureihers(Ardea Cinerea) von Fischteichen Und Fischzuchtanlagen. Z. Jagdwiss. 1981, 27, 271–282.
McAtee, W.L.; Piper, S.E. Excluding Birds from Reservoirs and Fishponds; U.S. Govt. Print. Off: Washington, DC, USA, 1936; Volume 120.
Pochop, P.A.; Johnson, R.J.; Agüero, D.A.; Eskridge, K.M. The Status of Lines in Bird Damage Control—A Review. In Proceedings of the Vertebrate Pest Conference 14; 1990; pp. 317–324. Available online: https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/188129715.pdf (accessed on 25 December 2022).
Wright, E.N. Modification of the Habitat as a Means of Bird Control. In The Problems of Birds As Pests; Murton, R.K., Wright, E.N., Eds.; Elsevier: London, UK, 1968; pp. 97–105.
Dekker, A.; Van der Zee, F.F. Birds and Grassland on Airports. In Proceedings of the International Bird Strike Committee Proceedings and Papers 23, London, UK, 13–17 May 1996; pp. 291–305.
Potter, C. Birds and Bird Control at Two Ontario Airports (Ottawa and North Bay Airport). In Proceedings of the Appendix 9, Minutes of the 25th Meeting of Bird Strike Committee, Toronto, ON, Canada, November 1996; Available online: https://www.jstor.org/stable/44517477 (accessed on 25 December 2022).
Demarchi, M.W.; Searing, G.F. Experimental Control of Earthworms with Terraclor at Vancouver International Airport; LGL Limited for Aerodrome Safety Branch, Transport Canada: Vancouver, BC, Canada, 1997.
Patton, S.R. Abundance of Gulls at Tampa Bay Landfills. Wilson Bull. 1988, 100, 431–442. Available online: https://sora.unm.edu/sites/default/files/journals/wilson/v100n03/p0431-p0442.pdf (accessed on 25 December 2022).
Shake, B. Orchard Bird Control with Decoy Traps. In Proceedings of the Bird Control Seminar 4. 1968, pp. 115–118. Available online: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/icwdmbirdcontrol/169/ (accessed on 25 December 2022).
Hardman, J.A. Bird Damage to Sugar Beet. Ann. Appl. Biol. 1974, 76, 337–341.
Draulans, D. The Effectiveness of Attempts to Reduce Predation by Fish-Eating Birds: A Review. Biol. Conserv. 1987, 41, 219–232.
Beg, M.A. General Principles of Vertebrate Pest Management. In Proceedings of the Pakistan Agriculture Research Council; Brooks, J.E., Ahmad, E., Hussain, I., Munir, S., Khan, A., Eds.; PARC: Islamabad, Pakistan, 1990.
Heighway, D.G. Falconry in the Royal Navy. In Proceedings of the World Conference on Bird Hazards National Research Council Canada; Kuhring, M.S., Ed.; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 1970.
Harrison, M.J. Municipality of Anchorage Sanitary Landfill Bird Hazard Analysis and Mitigation; Washington, DC, USA, 1986.
Harke, D. Wetting Agents and Their Role in Blackbird Damage Control. In Proceedings of the Bird Control Seminar 4; National Research Council Canada: Ottawa, ON, Canada, 1968; pp. 104–108.
Smith, R.N. The Use of Detergent Spraying in Bird Control. In Proceedings of the Bird Control Seminar 5; National Research Council Canada: Ottawa, ON, Canada, 1970; pp. 138–140.
Lustick, S.I. Wetting as a Means of Bird Control. In Proceedings of the Bird Control Seminar 7; National Research Council Canada: Ottawa, ON, Canada, 1976; pp. 41–47.
Glahn, J.F.; Stickley, A.R., Jr.; Heisterberg, J.F.; Mott, D.F. Impact of Roost Control on Local Urban and Agricultural Blackbird Problems. Wildl. Soc. Bull. 1991, 7, 511–522.
Dolbeer, R.A.; Mott, D.F.; Belant, J.L. Blackbirds and Starlings Killed at Winter Roosts. In Proceedings of the Eastern Wildlife Damage Management Conference 7; National Research Council Canada: Ottawa, ON, Canada, 1997; pp. 77–86.
Mikx, F.H.M. Goshawks at Leeuwarden Airbase. In Proceedings of the World Conference on Bird Hazards; Kuhring, M.S., Ed.; National Research Council Canada: Ottawa, ON, Canada, 1970; pp. 203–205.
Hahn, E. Falconry and Bird Control of a Military Airfield and a Waste Disposal Site; Vogel und Luftverkehr Bd: 1996. Available online: http://79.170.44.121/falconryheritage.org/uploads/itemUploads/3314/IBSC23%20WP37.pdf (accessed on 20 December 2022).
Blokpoel, H.; Tessier, G.D. Control of Ring-Billed Gull Colonies at Urban and Industrial Sites in Southern Ontario, Canada. In Proceedings of the 3rd Eastern Wildlife Damage Control Conference, Gulf Shores, AL, USA, October 1978; Available online: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1001&context=ewdcc3 (accessed on 20 December 2022).
Kenward, R.E. The Influence of Human and Goshawk Accipiter Gentilis Activity on Wood-Pigeons Columba Palumbus at Brassica Feeding Sites. Ann. Appl. Biol. 1978, 89, 277–286.
Risley, C.J. Bird Observations and Bird Control Measures at a Sanitary Landfill Site near Canadian Forces Base Trenton, Ontario; Canadian Wildlife Service: Ottawa, ON, Canada, 1983.
Wright, E.N. A Review of Bird Scaring Methods Used on British Airfields; Le Probleme des Oiseaux sur les Aerodromes; Busnel, R., Giban, J., Eds.; Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique: Paris, France, 1965; pp. 10–22.
Blokpoel, H. Gull Problems in Ontario; Canadian Wildlife Service: Ottawa, ON, Canada, 1980.
Sugden, L.G. Waterfowl Damage to Canadian Grain: Current Problem and Research Needs; Canada Wildlife Service Occasional Paper No. 24; Canada Wildlife Service: Ottawa, ON, Canada, 1976.
Moore, F.R. Influence of Solar and Geomagnetic Stimuli on the Migratory Orientation of Herring Gull Chicks. Auk 1975, 92, 655–664.
Southern, W.E. The Effects of Superimposed Magnetic Fields on Gull Orientation. Wilson Bull. 1974, 86, 256–271.
Southern, W.E. Orientation Responses of Ring-Billed Gull Chicks: A Re-Evaluation; Schmidt-Koenig, K., Keeton, W.T., Eds.; Springer: New York, NY, USA, 1978; pp. 311–317.
Wiltschko, R.; Nohr, D.; Wiltschko, W. Pigeons with a Deficient Sun Compass Use the Magnetic Compass. Science 1981, 214, 343–345.
Belant, J.L.; Ickes, S.K. Mylar Flags as Gull Deterrents. In Proceedings of the Great Plains Wildlife Damage Control Conference 13, 1997. Available online: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1358&context=gpwdcwp (accessed on 20 December 2022).
King, N.W.; Justesen, D.R.; Clarke, R.L. Behavioral Sensitivity to Microwave Irradiation. Science 1971, 172, 398–401.
Frey, A.H.; Messenger, R. Human Perception of Illumination with Pulsed Ultrahigh-Frequency Electromagnetic Energy. Science 1973, 181, 356–358.
Byman, D.; Wasserman, F.E.; Schlinger, B.A.; Battista, S.P.; Kunz, T.H. Thermoregulation of Budgerigars Exposed to Microwaves (2.45 GHz, CW) during Flight. Physiol. Zool. 1985, 58, 91–104.
Tanner, J.A. The Effects of Microwave Radiation on Birds: Some Observations and Experiments. In Proceedings of the National Research Council Canada Associate Committee on Bird Hazards to Aircraft, Ottawa, ON, USA, 1965. Available online: https://canadianbirdstrike.ca/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/Blokpoel_1976-1.pdf (accessed on 20 December 2022).
Tanner, J.A.; Davie, S.J.; Romero-Sierra, C.; Villa, F. Microwaves—A Potential Solution to the Bird Hazard Problem in Aviation. In Proceedings of the Wordl Conference on Bird Hazards to Aircraft, Kingston, ON, USA, 2–5 September 1969; pp. 215–221.
Poor, H.H. Birds and Radar. Auk 1946, 63, 315–318.
Drost, R. Zugvögel Perzipieren Ultrakurzwellen. Vogelwarte 1949, 1949, 57–59.
Knorr, O.A. The Effect of Radar on Birds. Wilson Bull. 1954, 66, 264.
Hild, J. Beeinflussung Des Kranichzuges Durch Elektromagetische Strahlung? Wetter Und Leben 1971, 23, 45–52.
Wagner, G. Untersuchungen Über Das Orientierungsverhalten von Brieftauben Unter RADAR-Bestrahlung. Rev. Suisse De Zool. 1972, 79, 229–244.
Lustick, S.I. Physical Techniques for Controlling Birds to Reduce Aircraft Strike Hazards (Effects of Laser Light on Bird Behavior and Physiology). 1972. Available online: https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/citations/AD0754269 (accessed on 20 December 2022).
Seubert, J.L. Biological Studies of the Problems of Bird Hazard to Aircraft; Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique: Paris, France, 1965.
Mossler, K. Laser and Symbolic Light on Birds in Order to Prevent Bird/Aircraft Collisions. In Proceedings of the Bird Strike Committee Europe 14, The Hague, The Netherlands, 22–26 October 1980.