Human society values birds for their intrinsic and aesthetic value as well as the ecosystem services they provide as pollinators, consumers of pests, and distributors of nutrients and seeds (Wenny et al. 2011). At the same time, conflict between birds and humans is an age-old phenomenon that has persisted as society has transformed and the scale of agriculture has expanded (Conover 2002). Managing conflict between birds and agriculture is challenging for many reasons. Foremost, the need to consider both human welfare and conservation of protected bird species is paramount, with nonlethal management methods preferred to lethal measures from societal, economical, and ecological standpoints (Miller 2007; Linz et al. 2015). Second, methods must be effective, practical, and economical for agricultural implementation. Finally, management methods must overcome characteristics that make birds difficult to manage including uncertainty in population estimates, fecundity, mobility, and adaptive behaviors. All challenges are compounded when attempting to establish management methods that fit within modern agricultural practices, while simultaneously supporting conservation efforts to protect wildlife. Labor-saving devices and methodologies resulting from agricultural advances in mechanical, chemical, genetic, and information technologies have facilitated a shift to larger crop fields, a broader range of suitable habitat for a variety of crops, and consolidated farms in North America (MacDonald et al. 20(3). This shift to large. less labor-intensive farms has supported the ability to feed an ever-increasing human population but has complicated the relationship between humans and wildlife. Modern agriculture directly impacts wildlife by altering natural habitat. resulting in the increase of species able to thrive in agricultural landscapes and the decline of species unable to adapt. Thus. agriculture often provides increased carrying capacity for species responsible for 217