Evaluation of two unmanned aircraft systems as tools for protecting crops from blackbird damage

Wandrie, Lucas J.; Klug, Page E.; Clark, Mark E.

doi:10.1016/j.cropro.2018.11.008

Cited by 20 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Directionality of an approaching threat is a component of perceived risk in predator-prey scenarios (Møller andTryjanowski 2014, Mulero-Pázmány et al 2017) and has been confirmed experimentally Bednekoff 2011, Blackwell et al 2019). Flight and alarm-call responses occurred less frequently during overhead flights, supporting observations where wildlife responded less frequently when drones approached at greater altitudes (McEvoy et al 2016, Rümmler et al 2016, Bevan et al 2018, Weimerskirch et al 2018, Wandrie et al 2019. Interestingly, approach type had no effect on alert behavior, indicating a 3-m decrease in flight altitude from the overhead approach to the head-on approach did not enhance alert responses.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 65%

“…Similar observations have occurred with American black bears (Ursus americanus) during drone encounters (Ditmer et al 2015). Future drone studies should identify minimum flight altitudes in combination with drone launch distances that lessen antipredator responses by wildlife (McEvoy et al 2016, Barnas et al 2018, Wandrie et al 2019. However, responses are expected to be species-specific (Bevan et al 2018, Blackwell et al 2019 and dependent on life-history characteristics including age or breeding status (Mulero-Pázmány et al 2017, Weimerskirch et al 2018.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 61%

“…Several studies have evaluated drone disturbance to birds (Rümmler et al 2016, Barnas et al 2018, but few have operated drones in a manner to intentionally motivate escape behavior (Vas et al 2015, McEvoy et al 2016, Weimerskirch et al 2018, Wandrie et al 2019. Previous research has shown that a multirotor drone can approach flocks of Mallard (Anas platyrhynchos), Greater Flamingo (Phoenicopterus roseus), and Common Greenshank (Tringa nebularia) to within 4 m without provoking an escape response (Vas et al 2015).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Wildlife managers have deployed multirotors to harass birds, but reports of efficacy are so far anecdotal (Lilleboe 2015, Curtis et al 2016, or drones were not operated in a manner to maximize disturbance (Wandrie et al 2019). However, Wang et al (2019) successfully deterred bird flocks from small vineyards, using a multirotor drone that carried a suspended prey effigy and a speaker that broadcasted distress calls.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The experiment allowed us to control for multiple confounding factors not considered in previous studies (Vas et al 2015, McEvoy et al 2016, such as bird identity, hunger, and habitat heterogeneity. We used the Red-winged Blackbird (Agelaius phoeniceus) as the model species because it behaviorally responds to both simulated predators (Yasukawa et al 1992) and drones (Wandrie et al 2019). Additionally, blackbirds (Icteridae) are frequently involved in aircraft-bird collisions (Dolbeer et al 2016) and are also recognized as agricultural pests in North America (Linz et al 2011, Klosterman et al 2013, Linz et al 2017, making them a candidate species to test avian frightening devices.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Testing a key assumption of using drones as frightening devices: Do birds perceive drones as risky?

et al. 2020

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Wildlife managers have recently suggested the use of unmanned aircraft systems or drones as nonlethal hazing tools to deter birds from areas of human-wildlife conflict. However, it remains unclear if birds perceive common drone platforms as threatening. Based on field studies assessing behavioral and physiological responses, it is generally assumed that birds perceive less risk from drones than from predators. However, studies controlling for multiple confounding effects have not been conducted. Our goal was to establish the degree to which the perception of risk by birds would vary between common drone platforms relative to a predator model when flown at different approach types. We evaluated the behavioral responses of individual Red-winged Blackbirds (Agelaius phoeniceus) to 3 drone platforms: a predator model, a fixed-wing resembling an airplane, and a multirotor, approaching either head-on or overhead. Blackbirds became alert earlier (by 13.7 s), alarm-called more frequently (by a factor of 12), returned to forage later (by a factor of 4.7), and increased vigilance (by a factor of 1.3) in response to the predator model compared with the multirotor. Blackbirds also perceived the fixed-wing as riskier than the multirotor, but less risky than the predator model. Overhead approaches mostly failed to elicit flight in blackbirds across all platform types, and no blackbirds took flight in response to the multirotor at either overhead or head-on approaches. Our findings demonstrate that birds perceived drones with predatory characteristics as riskier than common drone models (i.e. fixed-wing and multirotor platforms). We recommend that drones be modified with additional stimuli to increase perceived risk when used as frightening devices, but avoided if used for wildlife monitoring.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 65%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 61%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Testing a key assumption of using drones as frightening devices: Do birds perceive drones as risky?

et al. 2020

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Spraying drones: efficacy of integrating an avian repellent with drone hazing to elicit blackbird flock dispersal and abandonment of sunflower fields

Duttenhefner,

Greives,

Klug

2024

Wildlife Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Multiple management strategies exist to combat bird damage to agriculture. We explored combining two tools, drones as frightening devices and an avian repellent, to assess effectiveness of an integrated method to deter large flocks on complex landscapes. We evaluated the ability of a spraying drone (DJI Agras MG‐1P) deploying Avian Control (i.e. active ingredient: methyl anthranilate; hereafter MA) or water to elicit abandonment, flock reductions, latency to return, and behavioral changes of blackbirds (Icteridae) foraging in sunflower Helianthus annuus. Following hazing and spraying (MA = 32; water = 32 trials), the percent of flocks abandoning, partially abandoning, or remaining was 56%, 31%, and 13% for MA and 50%, 25%, and 25% for water, respectively. Following full abandonment, 14% more flocks returned following MA (83%) than water (69%), averaging 3.96 min ± 3.51 (SD) to return (MA = 4.12 min ± 4.03; water = 3.73 min ± 2.68). When reduction occurred, average decline was 47% ± 35 (SD) with MA and 44% ± 39 (SD) with water. Site conditions impacted the ability to maneuver the drone and observe flock behaviors, potentially resulting in variables other than treatment explaining the probability of abandonment and flock reduction. When controlling for flock size, number of lift‐offs following water treatments (0.23 min−1 ± 0.17 SD) was statistically less than the pre‐hazing period (0.43 min−1 ± 0.28 SD), however no relationship existed for MA treatments (post: 0.29 min−1 ± 0.32 SD; pre: 0.31 min−1 ± 0.20 SD). This difference may be due to a longer latency to return, decreasing the post‐hazing time period, or flightier birds after MA exposure. We found eight mins of hazing, and a 9‐l tank of repellent, was insufficient to elicit differences between water and repellent applications. We suggest extended hazing or additional negative stimuli (e.g. multiple drones, increased repellent) to increase efficacy.

show abstract

Monitoring active osprey nests with drones is more time efficient and less disturbing than conventional methods

Murphy,

Elmore,

Boudreau

et al. 2024

Wildlife Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Drones are used to monitor bird nesting sites at less accessible locations, such as on cliffs, human infrastructure, or within the tree canopy. While there are a growing number of studies documenting avian behavioral responses to various drones, there is a continued need to monitor taxa‐specific responses to different drone models. We explored both the time efficiency and impact of different nest survey methods (drones, nest climbing, and observations from a bucket truck) and different drone model sizes (small, medium, large) on the nest defense behavior of breeding ospreys. We conducted 166 surveys (126 drone, 25 climbing, 15 bucket truck) at 85 active nests across three nesting stages. We found variation in four of six pre‐defined behavioral categories, namely for calling, flying, at nest, and perching behaviors with survey method, sex, and nest stage. Females were more responsive to all survey methods compared to males and engaged in nest‐protection behaviors most frequently during incubation. Ospreys spent greater time at their nests during drone surveys compared to other methods. Agitated calling and flying were also less frequent during drone surveys. We recorded defensive behaviors across all survey types and there were no strikes on drones or researchers. Drone size appeared to influence behavior, with female ospreys spending, on average, 18% of survey time calling when surveyed with medium‐sized drone compared to smaller (8%) or larger (6%) models. Surveys with drones took less time to complete compared to the other methods tested. Based on our findings, drones appear to be the best choice for monitoring osprey nests as they are adaptable, time efficient, and result in less apparent disturbance to nesting ospreys than other methods tested. Our research aids in setting best practices, optimizing drone size, and developing evidence‐driven approaches for monitoring avian nests across a variety of landscapes and contexts.

show abstract

Evaluation of two unmanned aircraft systems as tools for protecting crops from blackbird damage

Cited by 20 publications

References 25 publications

Testing a key assumption of using drones as frightening devices: Do birds perceive drones as risky?

Testing a key assumption of using drones as frightening devices: Do birds perceive drones as risky?

Spraying drones: efficacy of integrating an avian repellent with drone hazing to elicit blackbird flock dispersal and abandonment of sunflower fields

Monitoring active osprey nests with drones is more time efficient and less disturbing than conventional methods

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About