Birds' Prevalence, Hazards and Evaluation Of

BIRDS’ PREVALENCE, HAZARDS AND EVALUATION OF

MANAGEMENT TECHNIQUES AT THE RAWALPINDI /

ISLAMABAD AIRPORT

SAMEERA ARSHAD (07-arid-1119)

Department of Wildlife Management Faculty of Forestry, Range Management and Wildlife Pir Mehr Ali Shah Arid Agriculture University Rawalpindi, Pakistan 2015 BIRDS’ PREVALENCE, HAZARDS AND EVALUATION OF

MANAGEMENT TECHNIQUES AT THE RAWALPINDI/

ISLAMABAD AIRPORT

SAMEERA ARSHAD

(07-arid-1119)

A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of

the requirements for the degree of

Doctor of Philosophy

Wildlife Management

Department of Wildlife Management Faculty of Forestry, Range Management and Wildlife Pir Mehr Ali Shah Arid Agriculture University Rawalpindi Pakistan 2015

CERTIFICATION

I hereby undertake that this research is an original one and no part of this thesis falls under plagiarism. If found otherwise, at any stage, I will be responsible for the consequences.

Student Name: Sameera Arshad Signature: ______Registration No: 07-arid-1119 Date: ______

Certified that contents and form of thesis entitled “Birds’ Prevalence, Hazards and Evaluation of Management Techniques at the Rawalpindi/Islamabad Airport” submitted by Ms. Sameera Arshad have been found satisfactory for the requirement of degree.

Supervisor: ______(Prof. Dr. Iftikhar Hussain)

Member: ______(Dr. Maqsood Anwar)

Member: ______(Prof. Dr. Sarwat Naz Mirza)

Member: ______(Dr. Ejaz Ahmad)

Chairman: ______

Dean, FRW: ______

Director Advanced Studies: ______

iii

Dedicated

“The Divine spark within each of us”

CONTENTS

Page

List of Tables xii

List of Figures xiv

List of Abbreviations xix

Acknowledgements xxi

ABSTRACT xxiii

1 GENERAL INTRODUCTION 1

2 RECONNAISSANCE SURVEY OF BENAZIR BHUTTO 7 INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT, ISLAMABAD 2.1 INTRODUCTION 7

2.2 REVIEW OF LITERATURE 8

2.3 MATERIALS AND METHODS 11

3.1 The Reconnaissance Survey 11

2.3.2 Secondary Data Collection 11

2.3.3 Study Site 13

2.3.3.1 The airport location 13

2.3.3.2 Main operator 13

2.3.3.3 Runway description 13

2.3.3.4 Aircraft movements 13

2.3.3.5 Airport buildings and terminals 15

2.3.3.6 Local climatic conditions 15

2.3.4 Site Selection in the Vicinity of BBIA 17

2.4 RESULTS 17

2.4.1 Bird Attractants in the Vicinity of BBIA 17

2.4.1.1 Water bodies 17

2.4.1.2 Public parks 19

2.4.1.3 Sports grounds 21

2.4.1.4 Localities adjacent to BBIA 21

2.4.1.5 Garbage dumps 24

2.4.2 Meetings and Discussions with Airport Authorities (CAA and 33 PAF) 2.4.2.1 Bird attractants at the airfield 33

2.4.2.1.1 Vegetation at the airfield 33

2.4.2.1.2 Structures attracting birds at the airfield 34

2.4.2.1.3 Water source 36

2.4.2.1.4 Lack of coordination among agencies 36

2.4.2.1.5 Public awareness 38

2.5 DISCUSSION 38

3 REVIEW OF BIRD STRIKE RECORD OF BENAZIR BHUTTO 45 INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT, ISLAMABAD 3.1 INTRODUCTION 45

3.2 REVIEW OF LITERATURE 46

3.3 MATERIALS AND METHODS 48

3.3.1 Data Collection 48

3.3.2 Data Analysis 49

3.4 RESULTS 50

3.4.1 Bird Strike Data Analysis of Nur Khan Base, PAF (1999- 50 2012) 3.4.2 Bird Strike Data Analysis of BBIA, CAA (2005-2012) 51

3.4.3 Combined Analysis of Bird strike Data of BBIA, CAA and 51 PAF Base Nur Khan (2005-2012) 3.4.4 Monthly and Seasonal Distribution of Bird Strike Data of 54 BBIA 3.4.5 Seasonal Analysis of Bird Strike Data of BBIA 54

3.4.6 Correlation between Bird Strikes and Met Data 58

3.4.7 Regression Analysis 65

3.4.8 Species Involved in Bird Strikes at BBIA 65

3.4.9 Type of Aircraft 70

3.5 DISCUSSION 75

4 HABITAT SURVEY FOR RECOGNIZING BIRD ATTRACTANTS 81

4.1 INTRODUCTION 81

4.2 REVIEW OF LITERATURE 81

4.3 MATERIALS AND METHODS 83

4.3.1 Site Description 83

vii

4.3.2 Data Collection 83

4.3.3 Species Identification 84

4.3.4 Scoring Data Sheets 84

4.3.5 Habitat Index 84

4.4 RESULTS 85

4.4.1 Site 1 (Mall road ) 85

4.4.2 Site 2 (Saddar) 87

4.4.3 Site 3 (Ayub Park) 87

4.4.4 Site 4 (Kachehri Chowk) 88

4.4.5 Site 5 (Soan Bridge) 89

4.4.6 Site 6 (Khan Research Laboratories, Cricket Stadium road) 89

4.4.7 Site 7 (Runway 30 End) 90

4.4.8 Site 8 (Bahria Town, Phase 8) 90

4.4.9 Presence of Agriculture, Aquaculture, Livestock and Grain 91 Storage Facilities 4.4.10 Commercial and Recreational Land Use 92

4.4.11 Waste Management 92

4.4.12 Water Sources 103

4.4.13 Nesting, Roosting, Loafing and Feeding Areas 103

4.5 DISCUSSION 111

viii

5 IDENTIFICATION OF HAZARDOUS BIRD SPECIES AND THEIR 114 HABITAT 5.1 INTRODUCTION 114

5.2 REVIEW OF LITERATURE 115

5.3 MATERIALS AND METHODS 118

5.3.1 The Point Count Method 119

5.3.1.1 Data collection 119

5.3.1.2 Species of concern 120

5.3.2 Data Evaluation 121

5.3.2.1 Species Density 121

5.3.2.2 Relative Abundance 121

5.3.2.3 The Simpson Biodiversity Index 121

5.3.2.4 Margalef Diversity Index 122

5.3.2.5 Clustering 122

5.3.3 Seasonal Effect on kite (Milvus migrans) 122

5.4 RESULTS 123

5.4.1 Estimation of Bird Species Density 123

5.4.2 Percentage Distribution of Species 123

5.4.3 K-Dominance Species Abundance Model 131

5.4.4 Simpson’s Biodiversity Index 131

5.4.5 Margalef Diversity Index 131

5.4.6 Bray-Curtis Cluster Analysis 132

5.4.7 Species Distribution 138

5.4.7.1 House Crow (Corvus splendens) 138

5.4.7.2 Kite (Milvus migrans) 139

5.4.7.3 Common Myna (Acridotheres tristis) 140

5.4.7.4 Black Drongo (Dicrurus macrocercus) 141

5.4.7.5 Bulbul (Pycnonotus cafer) 141

5.4.7.6 Egret (Egretta alba) 142

5.4.7.7 Pigeon (Columbia livia) and Dove (Streptopelia decaocto) 142

5.4.7.8 House Sparrow (Passer domesticus) 142

5.4.7.9 House Martin (Delichon urbicum) 143

5.4.8 Seasonal Effects on kite (Milvus migrans) 143

5.5 DISCUSSION 151

6 EVALUATION OF EXISTING MANAGEMENT TECHNIQUES AT 155 BENAZIR BHUTTO INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT, ISLAMABAD 6.1 INTRODUCTION 155

6.2 REVIEW OF LETRATURE 156

6.2.1 Bird Management Techniques at Airport 156

6.2.2 Removal Method (Shooting) 157

6.3 MATERIALS AND METHODS 158

6.3.1 Evaluation of Shooting Data (2011-13) of BBIA 158

6.3.2 Data Analysis 158

6.4 RESULTS 159

6.5 DISCUSSION 168

6.6 Evaluation of Scare Crow at BBIA 171

6.7 Specification of Scare Crow mounted at BBIA 172

6.8 Outcome of the Study 173

7 GENERAL DISCUSSION 175

CONCLUSION 179

SUMMARY 182

LITERATURE CITED 185

APPENDICES 199

List of Tables

Table No. Page

2.1 Selected study sites in the vicinity of BBIA, Islamabad 18

2.2 List of public parks within 8-10 km radius of BBIA, Islamabad 22

2.3 List of sports grounds within 8-10 km radius of BBIA, Islamabad 23

2.4 Dumping sites within 0.2-2 km radius of BBIA, Islamabad 27

2.5 Ranking of dumping sites present within 0.2-2 km radius of BBIA 30

Monthly records of bird strikes incidences (1999 to 2012) at PAF 3.1 52 Base Nur Khan, Rawalpindi

Monthly records of bird strikes incidences (2005 to 2012) at BBIA, 3.2 53 Islamabad (CAA)

Yearly and monthly records (2005 to 2012) of bird strike incidences 3.3 56 at (CAA and PAF) BBIA, Islamabad.

Seasonal mean monthly bird strike incidences from 2005 to 2012 at 3.4 59 BBIA, Islamabad and Nur Khan Base (CAA and PAF)

3.5 Regression Analysis of bird strike data of BBIA 66

3.6 Annual growth rate of bird strike at BBIA by Log-Linear Model 69

List of bird species recorded during habitat survey at each site in the 4 93 vicinity of BBIA, Islamabad

List of plant species recorded at each site during habitat survey in 4.1 96 the vicinity of BBIA, Islamabad

4.2 Classification and characteristics of study sites surveyed as habitat 100

xii

for birds in the vicinity of BBIA, Islamabad

Scoring for recognizing bird attractants at each study site in the 4.3 101 vicinity of BBIA, Islamabad

4.4 Bird score for each study site 105

4.5 Habitat Index (HI) of each site for habitat analysis 106

4.6 Habitat Composite Index (HCI) of each study site 108

4.7 Ranking of different habitats on the basis of HCI score 110

Cumulative bird species recorded during habitat survey (2011-2012) 5.1 129 at eight selected study sites

Bird population (mean number per 50 m radius) at 8 study sites 5.2 130 around BBIA, Islamabad (2011-212)

5.3 K-Dominance Species Abundance Model 133

5.4 The Simpson Biodiversity Index of all eight study sites 134

5.5 Margalef Diversity Index of all eight study sites 135

5.6 Cluster formation for similarity matrix 137

6.1 Past three years (2011-2013) shooting data of BBIA Islamabad 161

Mean monthly distribution and percentage of success of Shooting 6.2 162 data of BBIA, Islamabad (2011-2013)

6.3 Annual distribution of shooting data of BBIA (2011-2013) 163

6.4 Cost of shot per bird or animal (stray dog) killed 166

6.5 Annual cost of cartridges fired at BBIA during (2011-2013) 167

xiii

List of Figures

Figure No. Page

Transects used for reconnaissance survey around Benazir Bhutto 2.1 12 International Airport, Islamabad

2.2 Map of Benazir Bhutto International Airport Islamabad; Pakistan 14

An aerial view of the buildings and terminal along the runway of 2.3 16 BBIA, Islamabad; Pakistan

2.4 Location of three main water bodies within 8-10 km radius of 20

BBIA, Islamabad

2.5 Main parks and sports grounds in the vicinity of the BBIA, 20

Islamabad

2.6 Residential colonies in the surroundings of BBIA, Islamabad; 25

Pakistan

2.7 Residential colonies in the surroundings of BBIA, Islamabad; 26

Pakistan

2.8 Map showing open garbage dumps of solid waste (+) in the 29

vicinity of BBIA, Islamabad

2.9 Garbage dump just across the boundary wall of BBIA, Islamabad 31

2.10 Garbage dump adjacent to boundary of runway 30 end of BBIA, 31

Islamabad

2.11 Broken fence and garbage dump at boundary of BBIA, Islamabad 32

2.12 Garbage dump near Dr. A. Q. Khan road along perimeter fence 32

(southeast of runway) of BBIA, Islamabad

xiv

2.13 35 Vegetation strip along the runway of BBIA, Islamabad

2.14 35 A ditch near runway 12 end of BBIA, Islamabad

2.15 Structures (hangers) at PAF Base Nur Khan, provide nesting 37

places for birds

2.16 A board mounted on the boundary wall of BBIA, highlighting the 39

bird strikes issue

2.17 A public awareness circular on bird strikes issue, by the 40

Directorate of Flight Safety, PAF

2.18 Kites (Milvus migrans) on a tree in the vicinity of BBIA, 41

Islamabad

3.1 Number of bird strikes occurred during day and night time at PAF 55

Base Nur Khan, Pakistan (1999-2012)

3.2 Records of bird strikes occurred during day and night time at 55

BBIA, Islamabad (CAA), Pakistan

3.3 Number of bird strikes at BBIA, Islamabad (2005-2012) 57

Monthly distribution of bird strikes at BBIA, Islamabad (2005- 3.4 57 2012)

Mean monthly distribution of bird strikes in all five seasons at 3.5 61 BBIA, Islamabad (2005-2012)

Effect of maximum temperature on bird strikes at BBIA (2005- 3.6 62 12).

Effect of minimum temperature on bird strikes at BBIA (2005- 3.7 62 12).

3.8 Effect of rainfall on bird strikes at BBIA (2005-12). 63

Relationship between bird strikes, mean maximum and minimum 3.9 64 temperature at BBIA, Islamabad

3.10 Relationship between bird strikes and rainfall at BBIA, Islamabad 64

3.11 Bird strike trend in PAF data (1999-2012) of Nur Khan Base 67

3.12 Bird strike trend in CAA data (2005-2012) of BBIA, Islamabad 67

Bird strike trend in (CAA and PAF combined data) of BBIA 3.13 68 Islamabad

Monthly distribution of kites struck at BBIA, Islamabad during 3.14 71 (2005-2012)

Percentage distribution of birds involved in bird strikes at Benazir 3.15 72 Bhutto International Airport, Islamabad (2005-2012)

Percentage distribution of strikes with identified and unidentified

3.15a birds’ type responsible for collisions with aircraft at BBIA, 72

Islamabad (2005-2012)

Percentage distribution of damage to aircraft recorded at BBIA, 3.16 73 Islamabad (2005-2012)

Percentage distribution of damage by parts of aircraft at BBIA, 3.17 73 Islamabad

Type of aircraft involved in bird strikes, at BBIA, Islamabad 3.18 74 (2005-2012)

4 Habitat Composite Index (HCI) of all eight study sites 109

xvi

Percentage distribution of species density at Site 1 (Commercial 5.1 125 habitat) at Mall road Rawalpindi

Percentage distribution of species density at Site 2 (Commercial 5.2 125 habitat) Saddar, Rawalpindi

Percentage distribution of species density at Site 3 (Ayub Park, 5.3 126 recreational area) Rawalpindi

Percentage distribution of species density at Site 4 (Kachehri 5.4 126 Chowk) Rawalpindi

Percentage distribution of species density at Site 5 (Soan bridge, 5.5 127 water body and landfill site) Rawalpindi

Percentage distribution of species density at Site 6 ( KRL road) 5.6 127 Rawalpindi

Percentage distribution of species density at Site 7 (Runway 30 5.7 128 end) Rawalpindi

Percentage distribution of species density at Site 8 (Bahria Town) 5.8 128 (modern housing in natural area) Rawalpindi

Similarity among different habitats on the basis of various bird 5.9 136 species (Bray-Curtis Cluster Analysis)

Monthly mean number of kites at all study sites in the vicinity of 5.10 144 BBIA, Islamabad

5.11 Seasonality in mean count of kite (2011-2012) 144

Hourly mean kite count distribution pattern during study period 5.12 145 2011-2012

xvii

Hourly mean kite count distribution pattern during winter season 5.13 146 (Feb-Nov) at study sites around BBIA, Islamabad (2011-2012)

Hourly mean kite count distribution pattern during spring season 5.14 147 (Mar-Apr) at study sites around BBIA, Islamabad (2011-2012)

Hourly mean kite count distribution pattern during summer

5.15 season (May-Jun) at study sites around BBIA, Islamabad (2011- 148

2012)

Hourly mean kite count distribution pattern during monsoon

5.16 season (Jul-Aug) at study sites around BBIA, Islamabad (2011- 149

2012)

Hourly mean kite count distribution pattern during fall season 5.17 150 (Sep-Oct) at study sites around BBIA, Islamabad (2011-2012)

Number of cartridges fired and birds shot per year at BBIA 6.1 164 (2011-2013)

Number (mean ± ) of birds shot in five seasons (2011- 2013) at 6.2 164 BBIA, Islamabad

6.3 Monthly success rate (percent) of shooting at BBIA 165

6.4 Sketch of scare crow device placed at BBIA during 2009 174

xviii

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

A Airbus

AN Air Navigation

ANOVA Analysis of Variance

ASL Above sea level

ATR French Italian Aircraft (Aerei da Trasporto

Regionale)

ATSB Australian Transport Safety Bureau

B Boeing

BBIA Benazir Bhutto International Airport

BHI Bird Hazard Index

CAA Civil Aviation Authority

Doc. Document

FAA The Federal Aviation Administration (US)

FERA The Food and Environment Research Agency

HCI Habitat Composite Index

HI Habitat Index

IATA International Air Transport Association

IBIS ICAO Bird Strike Information System

ICAO International Civil Aviation Organization

ISB Islamabad

JFKIA John. F. Kennedy International Airport

KRL Khan Research Laboratories

xix

PAF Pakistan Air Force

PC Pearl Continental

PIA Pakistan International Airlines

PK Pakistan

PM Population Model

PMAS Pir Mehr Ali Shah

PMD Pakistan Meteorological Department

PV Photo voltaic r² Regression coefficient

S.D Standard deviation

S.E Standard error

SPSS Statistical Package for Social Scientists

TIA Tribhuvan International Airport

UK United Kingdom

UN United Nations

US United States

US$ US Dollar

USA United States of America

USAF United States Air Force

USDA United States Department of Agriculture

WWF World Wide Fund for Nature

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I am greatly obliged to Allah Almighty, the Compassionate and the

Merciful, who created man and differentiated him from all other creations, by bestowing upon him knowledge and wisdom. I am immensely grateful to the Holy

Prophet, Muhammad (PBUH), who enlightened our conscience by bringing us the message “IQRA” (read).

Pir Mehr Ali Shah Arid Agriculture University Rawalpindi, provided a superb platform for my thoughts to flourish and for me to excel in my ambitions, giving me splendid learning opportunities.

The work presented in this dissertation is a result of the considerate approach, vigilant pursuit, scholarly criticism and enlightened supervision of Prof.

Dr. Iftikhar Hussain (Dean, Faculty of Forestry, Range Management and Wildlife).

His meticulous analysis and rigorous critique improved not only the quality of this dissertation but also my overall understanding of Wildlife Management.

I wish to express my gratitude to all the members of my supervisory committee, Dr. Maqsood Anwar (Chairman, Department of Wildlife

Management), Prof. Dr. Sarwat Naz Mirza (former Dean of Faculty of Forestry,

Range and Wildlife) and Dr. Ejaz Ahmed (WWF-Pakistan), for their guidance, valuable suggestions and helping attitude throughout the study period.

My special thanks are to Pakistan Air Force, Air Head Quarters Islamabad and Civil Aviation Authority, Islamabad, for not only providing past bird strike

xxi

data but also their support to conduct this research at PAF Airbase Nur Khan and

Benazir Bhutto International Airport, Islamabad.

I wish to record my thanks to The Association of Commonwealth

Universities and Higher Education Commission of Pakistan for offering me

Commonwealth Scholarship (Split-site Ph. D. program 2009-2010) at the Food and

Environment Research Agency (FERA), York, UK.

My heartiest thanks are to my foreign supervisors, Dr. John Allan (Head of the Department of Wildlife Management) and Richard Budgey (Radar

Ornithologist) for their intellectual, technical and scholastic guidance throughout the study period at FERA. I also acknowledge their support for arranging my visit to Germany at German Bundeswehr (Federal Armed Forces) Geoinformation

Office (Biology Section) and at 29th International Bird Strike Conference, Cairns,

Australia.

In the end, I would like to express my deepest thanks to my (late) mother and my father for their unconditional love, support and prayers. They enabled me to excel in my ambitions. I would like to express my gratitude to my beloved husband Arshad Mahmood Malik, my son Muhammad Usama Arshad and my daughter Fatima Arshad for their love, support, encouragement and patience. I am greatly obliged to my brother, sisters, family members and my in- laws for their sincerity, prayers and love.

Sameera Arshad

xxii

ABSTRACT

Pakistan is a signatory to the Convention on International Civil Aviation.

According to this convention, it is an obligation for all member states to adopt measures for discouraging the presence of birds, on or in the vicinity of airport, that constitute hazard to aircraft operations. Bird population is an increasing threat to aircraft safety in most of the airports in Pakistan. Present study was carried out at Islamabad International Airport now called Benazir Bhutto International Airport

(BBIA) to identify potentially hazardous bird species, their habitat and to evaluate management techniques at this airport. Kites (Milvus migrans) were found to be the main hazardous species present in the vicinity of the airport. Results of habitat survey suggested that the airport is situated in a landscape area rich in bird attractants. Three main water bodies Korang, Lai and Soan surround the airfield.

Commercial areas, public parks, sports grounds, open garbage dumps and landfill sites present in the vicinity, provide ample feeding, nesting and roosting sites to potentially hazardous birds. In total 34 bird species and 63 plant species were recorded during this survey. Analysis of past bird strike record revealed that annual average number of bird strikes at BBIA during (2005-2012) was 26.62 ± 2.11

(S.E). In 57 percent of strikes records of BBIA (Civil Aviation Authority), bird species remained unidentified. However, of 43 percent of strikes with known bird type, birds of prey, mainly kite and eagle, were involved in 72 percent of the strikes. Kites were involved in 59 percent of all identified strikes. Analysis of damage by parts aircraft, suggested that engine damage was the cause of 92 percent of the accidents. Windshields were involved in 8 percent cases. Type of

xxiii

aircraft involved in collision with birds explored that A-310 accounted for 36 percent, B-373 for 19 percent, B-777 and ATR 10 percent each, B-747 for 5 percent, A-300, A-319, A-320, A-321 and A-332 two percent each. Seasonal variation in bird strikes was also envisaged. The results showed statistically significant difference (p < 0.01) between numbers of bird strikes occurring in all five seasons. Maximum strikes were recorded during fall (September-October), then in monsoon (July-August) followed by summer (May-June) and spring (Mar-

Apr) and least during winter (November- February). Relationship between meteorological and bird strike data suggested that there was a significantly positive correlation between bird strikes and maximum temperature (r = 0.452, P < 0.01), minimum temperature (r = 0.422, P < 0.01), and rainfall (r = 0.242, P < 0.01).

Positive regression coefficient (0.46) also indicated an increasing trend in bird strikes at Benazir Bhutto International Airport Islamabad. Eight study sites were selected for habitat survey, each representing a unique habitat supporting bird species. These sites were ranked by using Habitat Composite Index

(HCI).Naturally preserved recreational area (Ayub Park) showed highest rank (9.7) for the presence of bird attraction sites, followed by commercial habitats (6) and then habitat near water body (5.6). Mean number of kites in all study sites was 24.2

± 48.26 (S.E) and mean kite density was 0.003083. Highest number of kites was observed in the month of May followed by June then in September and August.

Significant difference in number kite count (p < 0.05) was observed in all five seasons. Hourly distribution pattern of kite movement peaked at 1430-1500 till

1700. Airport authorities are practicing some management techniques to control bird at this airport. Shooting data revealed that number of mean monthly cartridges

xxiv

fired during three year period, were 775 ± 72 (S.E) mean monthly birds shot recorded 298 ± 57(S.E). Mean monthly animals (stray dogs) killed were 26 ± 3

(S.E). Mean success rate of cartridges fired was 42 percent. Non-significant difference (p > 0.05) in bird shot was found between all five seasons. Mean monthly cost on cartridges used was Pak Rs. 27,125 (279 US $). Cost per animal

(stray dogs) or bird killed was Pak Rs. 84 (0.86 US$). Annual cost on cartridges was Pak Rs. 325,383 ± 1485 (S.E) (3,579 ± 73 US$).

The purpose of this study was to document birds’ prevalence, hazards and evaluation of management techniques at Islamabad International Airport. It is unlikely that the airport authorities would be able to manage bird free zone at their airport. The surrounding area of this airfield is highly conducive for birds’ activities and support potentially hazardous species. Large open garbage dumps in the surroundings of the airport should be removed with a view to reducing kites. It is important for the authorities to maintain correct bird strike record and to identify species correctly so that species’ behavior oriented control methods may be implemented. Moreover, habitat indexing showed difference in bird densities at each study site. On the basis of these indexing areas of high bird activity could be identified and management efforts could be focused in these areas. International and national rules and regulations must be followed strictly to ensure public safety.

xxv

Chapter 1 GENERAL INTRODUCTION

Evolution of flying ability in birds has ever been an inspiring phenomenon for mankind and could be traced back to 150 million years of our recorded history.

After observing and learning from this fascinating avian character for a long time, man succeeded to fly by inventing aircraft just 100 years ago. The development of this miracle brought a revolution in the movement of mankind across the globe.

With all comforts and swiftness, this invention is facing some problems during its operations which are as old as its origin including strike with birds. Orville Wright experienced the first ever bird strike with an aeroplane in September, 1908. This was followed by another collision between a gull and an aeroplane in California, in

1912, where loss of first human life occurred (Thorpe, 2003). A greater loss of 62 human lives directly linked to a bird strike was recorded on 4 October 1960, when a plane crashed while flying through flock of common starlings at Boston (Cleary and

Dolbeer, 2005). These incidents are increasing with the development of the air industry and operation at global level. The high technology and modern development from aircraft to space vehicles has also faced this risk and a collision between Turkey vulture and Space Shuttle Discovery during take-off operation was recorded on 26 July 2005 (Cleary and Dolbeer, 2005). Another drastic incident took place when a US Airways plane with 155 people on board ditched into

Hudson River in January 2009, apparently after striking at least one bird upon takeoff from New York's LaGuardia Airport. The Federal Aviation Administration

(FAA) US reported over 33,000 bird strikes to civil aircraft between 1990 and

2000 only in the US, where, most strikes caused negligible damage, but some resulted in serious accidents.

Collision between birds and aircraft (bird strikes) cause serious threat to aviation industry all around the world (Thorpe, 1997). Hundreds of human lives and aircraft have been affected by these collisions. Total number of fatal accidents from 1912 to 2010 has been recorded to 56, killing 276 people and destroying 108 civil aircraft (Thorpe, 2010). Allan and Orosz, (2001) estimated that bird strikes annually cost commercial carriers over US$ 1.2 billion worldwide from 1999 to

2000. Annual losses to US civil aviation due to wildlife strikes (98 percent involving birds) have been estimated to at least $ 677 million (Dolbeer et al., 2011). Bird strikes are equally hazardous to military flight operations. Since 1960, at least 250 military aircraft are damaged and 120 military personnel have been killed in these collisions (Cleary and Dolbeer, 2005). Richardson and West, (2000) have reported

286 serious bird strike accidents to military aircraft from 32 countries during 40 years period (1959-1999). Out of these 286 accidents, 63 were fatal which resulted in loss of at least 141 human lives (137 on board and 4 on the ground).

Development and evolution of the aeronautical technology is bringing the bird strike hazard at alarming levels (Cleary et al., 1999). The old model piston-powered aircraft were noisy and slow which were considered to easily repel the approaching birds and in case of any strike there was less damage.

However, modern aircraft are high speed and relatively quiet. Their engine fan blades are more susceptible than propellers to collision. When these aircraft strike

with birds, more structural damage and engine failures occur (Cleary et al., 1999).

An increase in aircraft operations and rise in population of hazardous wildlife species are some of the factors contributing to increased number of strikes (Dolbeer,

2000).

Variety of bird species are reported to be involved in bird strikes. Dolbeer et al. (1993) recorded at least 56 species of birds which struck with aircraft at John F.

Kennedy International Airport, New York, from 1979-1992. The birds most frequently reported to involve in the aircraft collisions were of larger body sizes and populations, for instance geese and gulls in the USA. Dolbeer et al. (2000) analysed

U.S. civilian bird strike data from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) database to rank wildlife species in term of damage caused by strikes with each species and have reported the composition of the recorded bird strikes as; waterfowl 32 percent, gulls 28 percent, and raptors 17 percent. From the sub-continent Indo-Pak region, Matthew et al. (1998) have reported Pariah kites

(Milvus migrans) to be the most hazardous species involved in the strikes at

Karipur, India. Upadhyaya and Dolbeer, (2001) also enlisted birds of prey such as kites, eagles, vultures and falcons as major bird species hazardous to aircraft operations at Tribhuvan airport, Kathmandu, Nepal.

Bird strike risk to aviation is also alarmingly increasing at most of the airports in Pakistan. Allan et al. (1999) have reported about 40 strikes with bird species having over 2 kg of body weight, from 1983 to 1998, in Pakistan. According to Civil Aviation Authority (CAA), Pakistan, 85 incidents of bird strikes took

place only at Allama Iqbal International Airport, Lahore, Pakistan; since 2002 with highest (19) incidents recorded during 2006 (The Nation, June 18, 2008). On June

25th, 2013 a PIA‟s Airbus 310, a two-engine aircraft with a capacity of 240 passengers, approaching Allama Iqbal International Airport experienced a bird hit on one of its engines. However, the pilot maneuvered the aircraft and landed safely while all the passengers on board also remained safe. A Russian-made Il-76 cargo plane crashed on 28th November 2010 in Pakistan's largest city Karachi, Fall eight crewmembers on board were killed in this accident, the likely cause was the damage of the aircraft engine caused by a bird strike. Another plane burst in flames shortly after a takeoff from the Karachi International Airport heading for Khartoum,

Sudan, and went down in a housing colony, killing at least 12 people as a result of `this crash.

Bird strikes are equally hazardous to military flight operations in Pakistan.

About 46 bird strikes have been reported only at one Pakistan Air Force (PAF) airbase from 1979 to 2000. According to Khan (1998) flying is hazardous because of birds‟ prevalence at and around many Pakistan Air Force airfields. On May 24th,

1967, Air Commodore Masroor was fly`ing a Martin B-57 Canberra and while approaching Mauripur Air Base for landing, his aircraft suffered bird strike/ingestion. The B-57 crashed in suburbs of Karachi and unfortunately

Masroor, who was not able to eject, lost his life in this accident. PAF Base

Mauripur in Karachi was renamed as PAF Base Masroor in memory of Air

Commodore Masroor Hussain who lost his life in an air accident due to bird strike suffered by his aircraft.

Pakistan is a signatory to the Convention on International Civil Aviation which stresses the states to adopt measures as necessary for discouraging the presence on or in the vicinity of an airport of birds constituting hazard to aircraft operations. The Aircraft (removal of danger to safety) Ordinance 1965 issued by

Ministry of Defense (Aviation Division), Government of Pakistan, also emphasises on taking measures for the removal of danger to the safety of aircraft caused by location of bird attracting sites around all airfields in the country. It also prohibits any other activity that attracts birds within 8 km radius of an aerodrome. Thus, the state has an international and as well as national obligation to ensure public safety and to take measures necessary to avoid bird strike hazards to aviation. Management infrastructures and appropriate logistics, are essential part of the aviation safety, and are available at each airport of the country; efforts are made to cope with the problem by utilizing all available technical and logistic resources. However, the current status of data on this issue is deficient with respect to major biological aspects including; identification of hazardous bird species, their habitat and factors facilitating population growth. These challenges evoked the need for planning a comprehensive research study in this area of wildlife management to make progress towards finding sustainable solutions for bird-aircraft collisions, for which basic information were needed to be generated through study of local situation at and around the airport.

The present study was, therefore, designed to generate base line data on hazardous (in conflict aviation) bird species, their habitat, factors contributing to sustain their population, associated hazards to aviation operations and evaluation of existing management techniques at Benazir Bhutto International

Airport, Islamabad.

The objectives of the study were:

1. Identification of hazardous bird species and their habitat around Islamabad

International airport.

2. Study of major natural and man-made ecological factors at and around the

airport that result in attraction of the problem bird species.

3. Evaluation of existing management practices for controlling the bird strike

problem.

To achieve these objectives, following studies were carried out:

1. Reconnaissance survey of the study area

2. Review of available bird strike records

3. Habitat survey for recognizing bird attractants

4. Identification of hazardous bird species and their habitat

5. Evaluation of existing management techniques

Chapter 2

RECONNAISSANCE SURVEY OF BENAZIR BHUTTO

INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT, ISLAMABAD

2.1 INTRODUCTION

Bird strike (bird and aircraft collision) is a serious and growing hazard to aviation industry throughout the world (De Vault et al. 2013). These strikes mainly occur at and around airports posing serious threat to aircraft operations (Thorpe,

2003). Since no two airports are exactly identical (Godin, 1994) bird hazards vary from airport to airport, which raises the need to analyse the airport and its vicinities accordingly. Islamabad International Airport, (now called Benazir Bhutto

International Airport, Islamabad; BBIA) is the third largest airport of the country and is located in the fourth most populous city of Rawalpindi in Pakistan. According to last official census carried out in 1998, the population of Rawalpindi was around

1.406 m (Population Census Organization, 1998), though it has increased many folds by the development of new residential and commercial areas around the airport. The areas in the vicinity of the airport provide ample feeding, nesting and roosting sites to bird species, many of which are potentially hazardous to aircraft operations.

According to International Civil Aviation Organization, a United Nations specialized agency, (ICAO, Doc. 9137), any significant bird or wildlife attractant falling within 13 km radius of an aerodrome, should be assessed to reduce its attractiveness to birds. Thus, main objective of this reconnaissance survey was to

8 generate information about the study area for further planning and research.

Emphasis was laid especially, on identification of potential bird attracting sites at and in the vicinity of Benazir Bhutto International Airport, Islamabad.

2.2 REVIEW OF LITERATURE

Ninety-seven percent of all wildlife strikes with aircraft are caused by birds and approximately 74 percent of wildlife strikes occur in the airport environment (i.e. at or below 152 m above ground level) during landing and takeoff phases,

(Dolbeer, 2006; Dolbeer et al., 2011). However, some strikes have been reported at the height of 6000 to 9000 m above ground level. Cleary et al. (2006) have also reported that 92 percent of all bird strikes occurred at or below 900 m above ground level; generally less than 8 percent strikes occur above 900 m and 61 percent occur at 30 m above ground level. Thus, it is essential to explore surrounding areas of an airfield to identify factors contributing to bird strike problem.

A number of factors have been identified as bird attractants near airports.

Birds are attracted to airports because of availability of food, water and shelter

(Burger, 1983). One of the basic principles in reducing bird strike hazards is to identify these attractants. Usually, many attractants acting in combination are responsible for birds‟ prevalence in the vicinity of airports. One of the major attractant at or around airports is water. Birds are attracted to water for drinking, bathing, feeding, loafing, roosting and protection (Wright, 1968). Servoss et al.

(2000) working on wildlife hazard assessment have found that water sources at or near Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport induced wildlife movement pattern

that put air traffic at risk. This was also true for the Salt River bed adjacent to the airport that also was a natural flight corridor for birds.

Birds require large amount of food and at airport environments the main food sources includes seeds, berries, grass, insects, earthworms, small birds and small mammals. Birds such as house sparrows, dove, wood pigeon, starlings, finches and waterfowl feed on different wide range of seeds and berries. Geese are attracted to open grassy area around runways. Gulls, starlings, robins and crows feed on earthworms which come out on the surface after rain. Gulls are opportunistic feeders and often feed on grasshoppers and ground nesting birds, as small part of their diet, while raptors are attracted to airfields because of rodents, birds and other small animals that are found in poorly maintained vegetation at the airfields (Godin,

1994).

Burger (1983) reported that landfills have also been proven to contribute to the bird strike by offering feeding resources and loafing sites to many birds such as gulls, vultures and kites (in India), Cattle Egrets (Bubulcus ibis) in Florida and pigeons (in

USSR). Washburn (2007) also suggested that traditional waste landfills in USA were very attractive to birds such as gulls, European starlings, rock pigeon, and crows. Matthew et al. (1998) documented that open garbage dumps and animal waste thrown out of slaughter houses attracted kites in the vicinity of airports in India.

Large areas of grassland maintained in airport environment, are also bird attracting feature. Birds come to these areas for feeding, drinking and resting.

Insects and invertebrates are more visible after fresh cutting of grass, and hence birds like myna, hoopoe, blackbirds and crows are commonly observed in these areas. Airports that have stands of pines or other coniferous trees are used by starlings and other birds as roosting sites (Wright, 1968).

Availability of animal based prey at and around the airports attracts birds.

These may include insects, earthworms, frogs, lizards, small animals, invertebrates, and rodents. Barras and Semans, (2002) have also reported that most serious hazard posed by the rodent population at the airport is the hazard of attracting raptor population. They have stressed on the need to manage vegetation, overall setting and land uses practices of the airport and its adjacent properties in such a manner that could reduce rodent population.

At immediate areas near airport runways, many man-made structures such as hangers, terminals, signs, lights, and other aviation appliances attract birds like pigeon, blackbirds and dove that are frequently involved in bird strikes (Servoss et al.,

2000). Areas in the vicinity of airports that may include natural or modified environments such as wetlands (ponds, rivers, streams, ditches and reservoirs), dumping sites, agricultural lands and forests may contain bird attractants. These areas provide roosting, breeding and feeding sites to the birds. Although birds spend most of the time in the vicinity of the airport, however, there are periods of activity, when these birds will cross the airfield to reach to their resource and thus may encounter with aircraft. Thus, surrounding areas of the airfield should also be monitored for bird activity (ATSB, 2002).

2.3 MATERIALS AND METHODS

2.3.1 The Reconnaissance Survey

According to Servoss et al. (2000) most of the bird strikes occur when aircraft are at low altitude so; they assessed wildlife hazards within the general zone of 8 km of Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport. In order to identify potentially hazardous bird attracting sites at and around BBIA, Islamabad, a vehicle-based transect, survey was carried out, within 8-10 km radius of the airfield.

All possible routes around the airport were visited frequently, either on vehicle or by foot, including all main roads i.e. Grand Trunk road, I. J Principal road, Muree road,

Rawal road, Airport road and Islamabad Expressway (Fig 2.1). The length of each transect was variable. Islamabad-Rawalpindi guide map published by Survey of

Pakistan and Google maps were also used for the survey. On the basis of this survey, study sites were selected for detailed investigations. Results from these sites are reported in later chapters; only a general account is given in this chapter.

2.3.2 Secondary Data Collection

In addition to reconnaissance survey, records of climatic factors, details on runway description and information on number of annual flight operations, and past bird strike records were also obtained from Civil Aviation Authority (CAA),

Pakistan Air Force (PAF) and other departments such as Pakistan Meteorological

Department (PMD) and Survey of Pakistan. Meetings with (PAF) personnel and

(CAA) staff were also arranged to explore the previous undocumented knowledge on bird strike issue at BBIA, Islamabad.

Islamabad International Airport

Fig 2.1: Transects (yellow lines) used for reconnaissance survey around

Benazir Bhutto International Airport, Islamabad

2.3.3 Study Site

2.3.3.1 The airport location

Benazir Bhutto International Airport (previously called Islamabad

International Airport) (IATA: ISB, ICAO: OPRN) (Fig. 2.2) is located in the city of

Rawalpindi, Pakistan; at Latitude: 33° 36' 59" N, Longitude: 73° 05' 57" E and at altitude 508 m ASL. It is the third largest airport in the country, located in the fourth most populous city of Rawalpindi.

2.3.3.2 Main operator

The airfield is shared with the transport and liaison squadrons of Pakistan Air

Force (PAF). It is also referred as Nur Khan Base (PAF) (previously called Chaklala airbase). However, Pakistan Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) is the main operator.

2.3.3.3 Runway description

BBIA currently has two runways. The main runway is known as „12/30‟ based upon compass bearing. It is 3,287 m in length, 46 m wide. In addition to main runway, there is also a secondary runway called 27/09, it is 2,590 m in length and

23 m wide. This runway is also called Charlie taxi way and is used for emergency landing or taking off. Both the runways are made of asphalt.

2.3.3.4 Aircraft movements

According to CAA, over 3,136,664 passengers used the airport in the year

2008-2009 and 34,025 aircraft movements were registered during this period.

Fig. 2.2: Map of Benazir Bhutto International Airport, Islamabad, Pakistan

2.3.3.5 Airport buildings and terminals

The air traffic control tower, terminal building, CAA offices and Nur Khan

Base offices are located on the southwest of the main runway (Fig. 2.3). Commercial buildings like cargo offices (Shaheen Airport Services, Gerry‟s) and PIA Flight

Kitchen are located along the road in t south of the airport. The surrounding area consists of residential colonies, commercial area and few vacant lots. Garbage dumps of solid waste are also found adjacent to the boundaries of the airport.

2.3.3.6 Local climatic conditions

Local climatic conditions are typified with a humid subtropical climate with long and hot summers, a monsoon and short wet winters. Annual average temperature varies from 4 °C to 38 °C and is rarely below 1 °C in winter or above 42

°C in summer. Eight year (2005-2012) meteorological data of the airport revealed that mean minimum temperature during winter (Nov-Feb) was 5.8 °C and mean maximum temperature in this period was 21.1 °C. During the spring months (Mar-Apr) these recordings were 14.0 °C and 28.7 °C, respectively. In summer months (May-Jun) temperature ranged between 23.0 °C and 38.3 °C.

During July-August which covers monsoon period mean minimum and maximum temperatures were 25.2 °C and 34.5 °C, respectively. For autumn period (Sep-Oct) minimum and maximum temperature ranged from 18.5 °C to 31.9 °C. Mean monthly rainfall for the winter, spring, summer, monsoon and fall seasons were

53.6 mm , 59.2 mm , 62.3 mm, 286.0 mm and 87.4 mm, respectively. The average annual rainfall was 990 mm, most of which occurred in the monsoon season. The relative humidity ranged from 40 percent (in May) to 70 percent (in August).

Fig. 2.3: An aerial view of the buildings and terminals along the runway of

BBIA, Islamabad; Pakistan

2.3.4 Site Selection in the Vicinity of BBIA

After conducting reconnaissance survey, study sites were selected using

Islamabad-Rawalpindi Guide Map of scale 1:30,000 published under the direction of Surveyor General of Pakistan, printed at the Survey of Pakistan Office, Faizabad

Murree Road, Rawalpindi. Eight sites were selected randomly, lying within 8 km radius of the BBIA. Each selected site represented different habitats (Table 2.1).

Details of each study site and characterization is given in chapter (4) on habitat survey for recognizing bird attractants.

2.4 RESULTS

Reconnaissance survey, conducted in the vicinity of the BBIA, Islamabad, suggested that there were many bird attracting sites lying within 8 km radius of the airport. These sites provided ample feeding, nesting and roosting sites to many bird species. Birds‟ prevalence in the surrounding environment of the airport is a potential threat to aircraft operation.

2.4.1 Bird Attractants in the Vicinity of BBIA

2.4.1.1 Water bodies

The airport is bounded by three main water bodies, river Korang, on the north east side at the distance of about 3 km from the central line of main runway, while the Nala Lai passes throughout along the southern boundary at the distance of about 3 km. Lai is famous for its floods particularly during monsoon season. Lai water has been heavily polluted with waste water, coming from houses, factories.

Table 2.1: Selected study sites in the vicinity of BBIA, Islamabad.

Sr. Site Latitude Longitude Arial Direction No. distance from from Airport Airport (km) Commercial 1 habitat(Mall 33.6058010 73.0437469 4.5 Nortthwest road)

Commercial 2 33.5932689 73.0540753 4.0 Northwest habitat (Saddar)

Naturally preserved 3 recreational area 33.5676407 73.0833224 5.0 Southwest (Ayub National Park)

Buildings with old plantation 4 33. 5828324 73.0671474 4.5 Northwest (Kachehri Chowk)

Water body 5 landfill site 33.5983944 73.0441352 6.5 Southwest (Swan bridge)

Sports ground 6 KRL cricket 33.6196945 73.1056739 0.5 Northeast ground

Landfill site 7 33°36´28.51" 73°07´13.61" 0.5 Northeast Runway 30 end

Modern housing society in 8 natural hilly area 33.49468180 73.1036102 8.0 Southwest Bahria Town Phase 8

19 and other sources. Both the water bodies i.e. Lai and Korang meet at Soan river, flowing in the southern direction 6 km away from the runway 30 (landing site)

(Fig. 2.4).

Bird species such as Kite (Milvus migrans), Common myna (Acridotheres tristis), Bank myna (Acridotheres ginginianus), Jungle Myna (Acridotheres fuscus),

Pigeon (Columba livia), Indian ring dove (Streptopelia decaocto), house crow

(Corvus splendens), house sparrow (Passer domesticus), house Swift (Apus affinis), small blue king fisher (Alcedo atthis), large egret (Egretta alba) lesser Egret

(Egretta garzetta) and little ringed plover (Charadrius dubius) were observed commonly in the surrounding areas of these water bodies, either exploiting the feeding resources or by resting and loafing on the nearby wires, trees or other available perching sites.

2.4.1.2 Public parks

Fourteen main public parks present within 8 km radius of the airport are listed in (Table 2.2, Fig. 2.5). Plantation in these parks, included tree species like

Eucalyptus (Eucalyptus camaldulensis), Siris (Albizia lebbeck), Indian Beach tree

(Pongamia pinnata), Tree of heaven (Aillanthus altisimia), Cypress (Cupressus sempervirens), Golden shower (Cassia fistula), Flame of the forest (Butea monosperma), Bamboo (Bambusa bambos), Pine (Pinus roxburghii), Bo-tree (Ficus religiosa) Rubber Plant (Ficus elastica), Chinaberry (Melia azedarach), Date Palm

(Phoenix dactylifera), Mango (Magifera indica), Mulberry (Morus alba), Paper

Mulberry (Broussonetia papyrifera), Bottle Palm (Hyophorbe lagenicaulis), Silk

Fig. 2.4: Location of three main water bodies, Lai, Soan and Korang within 8-10 km radius of BBIA, Islamabad.

Fig. 2.5: Main parks and sports ground in the vicinity of the BBIA,

Islamabad

21 cotton tree (Salmalia malbarica), Willow (Salix acmophylla), Indian rose wood

(Dalbergia sisso), Maple (Acer saccharum), Wild Fig (Ficus palmata), Common Fig

(Ficus carica), Olive (Olea ferruginea), Jacaranda (Jacaranda mimoesifolia), Pencil

Pine (Cupressus sempervirens), Banyan (Ficus benghalensis), Black Plum

(Syzygium cumini). In addition to these tree species, vegetation of these parks also included; herbaceous plants like Cattail (Typha angustifolia), Marijuana (Cannabis sativa), shrubs like Castor oil plant (Euphorbia helioscopia)and grass (Cynodon dactylon) etc. These plant species offer ample nesting, roosting and feeding sites to many bird species. (Personal data)

2.4.1.3 Sports grounds

In addition, to public parks there was an array of stadiums and sports grounds within the vicinity of the airport (Table 2.3, Fig. 2.5). These areas were usually undisturbed, bird species like myna (Acridotheres tristis), house sparrow

(Passer domesticus), hoopoe (Upupa epops) and dove (Streptopelia decaocto) were observed using grassy areas of these sport grounds for feeding and resting purpose.

Kites (Milvus migrans) were also seen sitting in the verdant fields of these sports grounds and golf clubs.

2.4.1.4 Localities adjacent to BBIA

BBIA is surrounded by a large number of housing societies and unplanned residential and commercial areas. Major localities within the close vicinity of the airport included; Shah Khalid colony, Shah Faisal colony, Dhok Hafiz, Dhok Lalial,

Dhok Gangal, Chah Sultan, Khurram Colony Mangral Town, Al Noor colony,

Table 2.2: List of public parks within 8-10 km radius of BBIA, Islamabad

Sr. Parks/ Golf Club Latitude Longitude Arial distance No. from Airport (km)

1 Ayub National Park 33.567640 73.083322 05

2 Loi Bher Wildlife Park 33.568611 73.120833 04

3 Liaquat Bagh 33.606104 73.064145 03

4 Jinnah Park 33.584641 73.073731 04

5 Rumi Park 33.599507 73.042926 05

6 Shah Baloot Park 33.595956 73.047261 4.5

7 Rawalpindi Golf Club 33.605801 73.043747 05

8 Race Course 33.604489 73.036100 06

9 DHA Jungle Park 33.539614 73.099063 6.5

10 Ladies Park Dhok Hassu 33.606988 73.056335 4.5

11 Park in Commercial Market 33.637703 73.069590 01

12 502 Workshop Park 33.584351 73.065336 06

Lalazrar

13 Ladies Park Gawalmandi 33.606988 73.056335 03

14 Nawaz Sharif Park 33.648609 73.077051 2.5

Table 2.3: List of Sports grounds within 8-10 km radius of BBIA, Islamabad

Arial distance Sr. Sports Ground Latitude Longitude from No. Airport (km)

The Rawalpindi Cricket 1 33.651501 73.075881 03 Stadium

2 Army Cricket ground 33.589000 73.053141 05

3 KRL Cricket ground 33.619694 73.105673 0.5

Attock Oil Refinery cricket 4 33.536910 73.077420 06 ground

5 Army Hockey Stadium 33.589000 73.053141 05

Noor Station Ground Dhoke 6 33.625881 73.028259 4.5 Hassu

Saddiq Abad, Satellite town, Chaklala, Shah Faisal colony, Chaklala, Jhanda

Cheechi, Saddar, Muree road, Peshawar road, Kachehri chowk, Lalkurti, Gulraiz,

Defence Housing Authority, Bahria Town (Figs. 2.6, 2.7). Few housing societies had well developed solid waste disposal system while many others, lacked proper garbage disposal system which resulted in accumulation of solid waste in the city. So, it was important to identify habitat and explore land use practices near the airport in relation to bird population and bird use pattern.

2.4.1.5 Garbage dumps

District Government, Rawalpindi Cantonment Board (RCB) and Chaklala

Cantonment (CCB) are responsible for ensuring sanitation and removing solid waste from the city. About 1500 tones solid waste is collected daily through, 370 vehicles from over 1700 designated dumping sites across the Rawalpindi city with a workforce of 3000 working in the civic agencies (Associated Press of Pakistan,

2014) however, due to rapidly increasing population of Rawalpindi city and non-availability of proper garbage disposal system, solid waste from the nearby colonies, houses, restaurants, hotels, markets, shopping areas, butcheries and drains was dumped openly, many open solid waste dumps were also observed in the surrounding area of the airport. These dumping sites (Table 2.4, Fig. 2.8) were found to be offering abundant feeding resources for many potentially hazardous bird species like kites (Milvus migrans), crows (Corvus splendens), common myna

(Acridotheres tristis), Jungle myna (Acridotheres fuscus), Bank Myna (Acridotheres ginginianus), house sparrow (Passer domesticus) and egrets (Egretta alba).

Fig 2.6: Residential colonies in the surroundings of BBIA, Islamabad; Pakistan.

Fig 2.7: Residential colonies in the surroundings of BBIA, Islamabad; Pakistan

Table 2.4: Dumping sites within 0.2-2 km radius of BBIA, Islamabad

Sr. Dumping Sites Latitude Longitude Direction Estimated aerial No. from the distance from Airport the Airport (km)

1 Service road, Shah Khalid Colony 33º60´38.09¨ N 73º11´35.68¨ E Southeast 0.5

2 Dumps near service road opposite Sain Gi 33º36´19.88¨ N 73º06´57.84¨ E Southeast 0.5 and Bao Gi Restaurant

3 Dumps all along Rawal road on left side 33º37´01.93¨ N 73º04´55.32¨ E Southwest 1.0

4 Dhok Lalyal 33º36´50.21¨ N 73º06´41.92¨ E Northeast 0.4

5 Dumps near Bilal Mosque on CAA land 33º37´04.10¨ N 73º06´18.08¨ E Northeast 0.4

6 Road leading to Shaheen Town 33º61´00.91¨ N 73º12´20.52¨ E Southeast 0.2

7 Dr A.Q. Khan road opposite to KRL cricket 33º37´10.49¨ N 73º06´25.49¨ E Southeast 1.0 stadium

8 Khanna road along the graveyard near ASF 33º37´32.10¨ N 73º05´12.48¨ E Northwest 2.0 camp

9 Approach area near runway 30 33º36´30.96¨ N 73º07´10.71¨ E Southeast 1.0

10 Dhok Gangal 33º40´45.33¨ N 73º49´38.83¨ E Northeast 1.0

Continued

Table 2.4: Dumping sites within 0.2-2 km radius of BBIA, Islamabad. page 2

Sr. Dumping Sites Latitude Longitude Direction from Aerial distance from No. the Airport the Airport (km) 11 Gillani Market Chaklala village 33º61´11.28¨ N 73º07´56.60¨ E Southwest 1.5

12 Along railway track Chaklala village 33º36´05.02¨ N 73º06´33.81¨ E Southwest 1.0

13 Opposite Fazaia Intermediate College 33º37´38.84¨ N 73º04´40.18¨ E Northwest 1.5

14 Ali Nawaz Chohan Chowk 33º37´34.18¨ N 73º04´32.01¨ E Northwest 0.5

15 Asghar Mall road 33º62´76.94¨ N 73º06´05.72¨ E Northeast 1.0

16 Commercial Market near Children Park 33º´63.77.03¨ N 73º06´95.90¨ E Southeast 2.0

17 Khanna road 33º37´44.82¨ N 73º06´40.15¨ E Northeast 2.0

18 Magral Town 33º61´35.05¨ N 73º11´85.48¨ E Southeast 2.0

19 Al Noor colony Band Khanna road 33º37´42.88¨ N 73º06´42.02¨ E Northeast 2.0

20 Saddiqabad Chowk 33º38´15.51¨ N 73º04´31.63¨ E Northwest 1.0

21 Kurrey road Khurram colony 33º37´32.27¨ N 73º05´39.62¨ E Northeast 1.5

Fig 2.8: Map showing open garbage dumps of solid waste (+) in the vicinity of BBIA, Islamabad

Table 2.5: Ranking of dumping site present within 0.2 - 2 km radius of BBIA.

Sr.No. Dumping Sites Ranking 1 Service road, Shah Khalid Colony 2 2 Dumps near service road opposite Sain Gi and Bao Gi 2

3 RestaurantDumps all along Rawal road on left side 2 4 Dhok Lalyal 2 5 Dumps near Bilal Mosque on CAA land 2 6 Road leading to Shaheen Town 3 7 Dr A.Q. Khan road opposite to KRL cricket stadium 2 8 Khanna road along the graveyard near ASF camp 2 9 Approach area near runway 30 3 10 Dhok Gangal 2 11 Gillani Market Chaklala village 2 12 Along railway track Chaklala village 2 13 Opposite Fazaia Intermediate College 2 14 Ali Nawaz Chohan Chowk 2 15 Asghar Mall road 2 16 Commercial Market near Children Park 2 17 Khanna road 2 18 Magral Town 2 19 Al Noor colony Band Khanna road 2 20 Saddiqabad Chowk 2 21 Kurrey road Khurram Colony 3 Note: 0= Solid waste/ garbage not present; 1= present but no bird problem noted or anticipated; 2= site attracts some hazardous birds creating possible or potential problem, site should be monitored; 3= site has significant bird number that may become hazardous for aircraft operation

Fig 2.9: Garbage dump just across the boundary wall of BBIA, Islamabad

Fig 2.10: Garbage dump adjacent to the boundary of runway 30 end of BBIA,

Islamabad

Fig 2.11: Broken fence and garbage dump at boundary of BBIA, Islamabad

Fig 2.12: Garbage dump near Dr. A.Q. Khan road, along perimeter fence (southeast

of the runway) of BBIA, Islamabad

Meetings with CAA and PAF revealed that prevalence of those open garbage dumps in the vicinity of the airfield were a constant threat to aircraft operations. Although, circulars were sent by Environment Control Officer and the

Airport Manger, CAA to District Officer (Solid Waste Management) City District

Government, Rawalpindi, however, no effective measures were taken in this regard.

Garbage was removed temporarily and it started accumulating in very short time period. Sometimes private contractors were hired for garbage lifting, though they picked up the refuse but again dumped it in the nearby vicinity in order to save their fuel cost.

2.4.2 Meetings and Discussions with Airport Authorities (CAA, PAF)

Several meetings and discussions were held with Civil Aviation and Pakistan

Air Force personnel, during the study period, to have an insight on bird strike issue at

BBIA Islamabad and at PAF base Nur Khan. As a result of these discussions several issues were documented. These concerns are classified as follows:

2.4.2.1 Bird attractants at the airfield

2.4.2.1.1 Vegetation at the airfield

The environment inside the airport favored bird activity. Tree species recorded inside the perimeter of the airfield included Eucalyptus (Eucalyptus camaldulensis), Pine (Pinus roxburghii), Siris (Albizia lebbeck), Cypress

(Cupressus sempervirens), Golden shower (Cassia fistula), Indian rose wood

(Dalbergia sisso), Bo- tree (Ficus religiosa), Rubber Plant (Ficus elastica), Bottle

Palm (Hyophorbe lagenicaulis), Date Palm (Phoenix dactylifera), Jacaranda

(Jacaranda mimoesifolia). In addition to these tree species, herbaceous plants like

Cattail (Typha angustifolia), Marijuana (Cannabis sativa), shrubs such as Castor oil plant (Euphorbia helioscopia) and grass (Cynodon dactylon) were also present inside the perimeter of the airfield. These plant species offered nesting, roosting, perching and feeding sites to many bird species.

There was also a dense strip of mixed strands of Paper Mulberry

(Broussonetia papyrifera), Eucalyptus (Eucalyptus camaldulensis) and Indian rose wood (Dalbergia sisso) to North-East of runway 30 (Fig. 2.13). These trees and shrubs served as nesting, roosting and feeding sites of bird species mainly kite

(Milvus migrans), house crows (Corvus splendens) and common myna (Acridotheres tristis). A roost of about 1500-2000, house crows inhibited this strip. About 2-3 km long area covered by this wild vegetation was cleared in the year 2010. Vegetation control at the airport was also a problem. The responsibility was shared between

CAA and PAF base Nur Khan. Lack of inter departmental coordination and cooperation sometimes intensified the problem.

2.4.2.1.2 Structures attracting birds at the airfield

Solid waste dumps in and along the drains passing along the inner side of the perimeter fence of the airport was another bird attraction point within the airfield. A free flowing waste drain full of refuse was a source of attraction for bird species like mainly of kite (Milvus migrans), house crows (Corvus splendens) common myna (Acridotheres tristis) egrets (Egretta alba). Hangers (Fig. 2.15), light shades, poles, towers inside the airport boundary were also used as nesting

Fig 2.13: Vegetation strip along the runway of BBIA, Islamabad

Fig 2.14: A ditch near runway 12 end of BBIA, Islamabad

and resting sites for pigeon (Columba livia), house sparrow (Passer domesticus), common myna (Acridotheres tristis) and other bird species. Wreck of Air Blue plane crashed in July 2010 was also dumped inside the airport boundary which was providing shelter not only for small birds but for rodents too (personal observations).

2.4.2.1.3 Water sources

Bird species including Coot (Fulica atra), Moorhen (Gallinula chloropus), Indian

Roller or Blue Jay (Coracias benghalensis), Black Drongo (Dicrurus macrocercus),

Hoopoe (Upupa epops) were observed near a ditch along undershoot of runway

12 (Fig. 2.14). Rain water also accumulated in low lying areas inside the boundary.

Earthworms, crickets, frogs which were abundant during monsoon season (July-

August) were consumed as food sources mainly by the kites (Milvus migrans) and other bird species.

2.4.2.1.4 Lack of coordination among agencies

The airport is shared by the two organizations (CAA and PAF). Lack of

coordination existed among these agencies such as Civil Aviation Authority, the

main regulator, and Nur Khan Base (Pakistan Air Force) and different departments

which were responsible for ensuring sanitation and solid waste management in the

city like, District Solid Waste Management, Rawalpindi Cantonment Board, and

Chaklala Cantonment Board. Distribution of resources, manpower and

responsibilities remained areas for disagreement.

Fig 2.15: Structures (hangers) at PAF Base Nur Khan, provide nesting places for

birds

2.4.2.1.5 Public awareness

CAA and PAF both were fully aware of the fact that general public awareness on the bird strike issue, at and around airport, was lacking and needed to be improved. Both the electronic and print media were used for awareness (Figs. 2.16,

2.17). Billboards and public notices were issued from time to time especially at the time of Eid-ul-Azha when slaughtering of animals (mainly cow, sheep, goat, camel and buffalo) is done as a part of religious obligation. On October 27, 2012, a local

T.V channel also reported about the aircraft bird strike hazard.

The report could be viewed on the following web site:

(http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xunhml_aircraft-bird-strike-hazard_auto)

2.5 DISCUSSION

BBIA Islamabad is situated in thickly populated urban area of Rawalpindi city, with many bird attracting sites in its vicinity like natural vegetation, water bodies, open garbage dumps and commercial areas. Results of reconnaissance survey conducted in the vicinity of BBIA suggested that these habitats provided ample feeding, nesting and roosting sites to birds species.

A factor that provided huge feeding resource to birds was open garbage dumps present in the city. These open garbage dumping sites adjacent to and all around the airfield is a serious safety concern. Shops, markets, vacant lots and improper garbage disposal system of the city attracted bird species mainly kites

(Milvus migrans) which is a potential hazard to aviation. Trash transfer station located at site 5, under Soan bridge and at site 7, landing site near runway 30 end, are

Fig 2.16: A board mounted on the boundary wall of BBIA, Islamabad, highlighting

the bird strike issue

Fig 2.17: A public awareness circular on bird strike issue, by the Directorate of

Flight Safety, PAF.

Fig 2.18: Kites (Milvus migrans) on a tree, in the vicinity of BBIA, Islamabad.

of serious safety concern. These garbage dumps, lying underneath the flight path should be removed to avoid hazards caused by kites. Similar bird problem has been reported by (Matthew et al., 1998 ) in aerodromes of India where Milvus migrans were reported to be numerous and hazardous for aircraft operation and were attracted to huge quantities of food available in waste thrown out of slaughter houses and garbage dumps in the vicinity of Indian aerodromes. Studies conducted by (Upadhyaya and Dolbeer, 2001) at Tribhuvan International Airport,

Nepal, also suggested that birds of prey were major hazardous bird species at this airport, which were attracted to solid waste dumping site and nearby jungle area providing nesting, roosting sites, the garbage filling station near river bank in the close vicinity of airport was also a major attractant.

Water bodies in the surrounding area of BBIA, which include ponds, ditches, stream, marshes, lake and reservoirs originating out of Lai, Soan and Korang river serve as bird attracting sites and provide ample food to problem bird species.

Moreover, presence of water sources he airports; provide variety of food, including frogs, tadpoles, insects‟ larvae, earthworms, invertebrates and aquatic plants.

Contaminated rivers along the sides of the runway, and poor municipal solid waste management and mergence of earthworms, after rainy days in monsoon were the bird attraction features at TIA airport Nepal. Special emphasis should be laid to monitor bird activity in such areas.

The airport environment of BBIA is itself highly conducive for bird activities. A number of factors that attract birds at the airfield include standing

water near runways after rainy days, water in a ditch near under shoot 12 (Fig.

2.14). Bird are attracted to water sources for drinking and bathing purpose (Wright,

1968), moreover, birds like moorhen and coot were also observed in these area.

According to Burger (1983), all fresh water ponds or standing water on runways or parking lots should be removed, as this would reduce the number of birds coming on the airfield for drinking and feeding purpose. Bird attracting feature and structure at the airport should be strictly monitored and reduced as presence of standing water or ditches at the airfield would attract bird species (Airport Service Manual Doc.

9137 part 3).

Hangers and other structure which are being used as nesting or roosting sites could be safeguarded by placement of netting or bird scaring devices. Godin

(1994) identified that starlings, pigeons, house sparrow and swallows often roost or nest in large number in airport buildings. These birds should not be ignored just starling were responsible for tragic disaster in Boston in 1960 (Thrope, 2003).

Exclusion methods like netting, balls, wires, foam, overhead wires and cables in this area could reduce bird number at airfields (Harris and Davis, 1998). Hangers, poles, lights, telephone towers which attracted birds like sparrow, pigeon, myna and kite at BBIA could be made bird free by the use of these exclusion methods.

Dense vegetation at the airfield may attract birds for roosting and hence may result in any mishap, for example, although small in size; starlings fly in dense flocks and pose serious threat to aircraft. If these roosting areas are removed these birds could go elsewhere (Wright, 1968). Vegetation strip along the runway 30

(Fig.2.13) supported a roost of 1500-2000 crow on the airfield. However, removal of vegetation from this area shifted the flight line.

Lack of coordination among agencies could be settled by task division.

Public awareness on the bird strike issue would definitely bring some change in the attitude of people and that could bring change in the society. Sanitation conditions should be satisfactory around the vicinity of airport. It is especially true around food processing units, dumping sites and outdoor eating areas including parks hotels, flight kitchens, restaurants and picnic areas (Godin, 1994).

Despite the fact that there are National and International rules and regulations on public safety in air, however implementation of these rules and regulation vary from country to country. In developing countries like India, Nepal and Pakistan there are certain impediments such as lack of resources, education, experts, political and economic factors, which contribute to the problem and such issues of public safety are often ignored due to negligence or lack of political will.

International Organizations like UN and their working agencies should provide guidelines to bridge the gap, in recommended practices, between developing and developed countries, so that these issues of high priority must not be overlooked.

Chapter 3

REVIEW OF BIRD STRIKE RECORD OF BENAZIR BHUTTO

INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT, ISLAMABAD

3.1 INTRODUCTION

Birds‟ risk to aviation is alarmingly increasing at most of the airports in

Pakistan. According to Civil Aviation Authority (CAA), Pakistan, a Pakistan

International Airline (PIA) flight PK-721 suffered bird hit during landing at Allama

Iqbal International Airport Lahore, on 7 May 2014, the aircraft sustained minor damage. On 1st May 2014, a PK 211 flight having more than 140 passengers onboard suffered bird ingestion into one of its engine. The flight resumed its journey after a delay of several hours. Another PIA flight PK 898, from Lahore to

Kuala Lumpur, suffered bird strike during landing on 23rd April 2014.

(http://www.pakakhbar.com/civil/civilavi.html). On 25th June, 2013, a PIA Airbus

310 (two engine aircraft with 240 passengers capacity), experienced a bird hit on one of its engines (http://www.pakakhbar.com/civil/civilavi.html). A Russian-made

II-76 cargo plane crashed in November 2010 at Karachi airport, killing eight crewmembers on board and 12 on ground, the likely cause was the Damage of the aircraft engine (http://en.ria.ru/world/20101128/161533955.html). As many as 85 incidents of bird strikes took place only at Allama Iqbal International Airport,

Lahore, Pakistan since 2002 to 2008 with highest (19) incidents recorded during

2006 (The Nation, 3rd, September, 2012). According to Khan (1998) bird strikes also pose threats to aircraft operations at the Pakistan Air Force Bases.

The objectives of present study were to analyse past bird strike data of Nur

Khan Bas, PAF (1999-2012) and that of BBIA; Islamabad (2005-2012) to explore annual and seasonal trends in bird strikes at this airport. Although the data were too small for any comprehensive analysis, however, I tried to explore some basic information regarding bird strikes. The information generated by this study highlighted the periods of high bird activity that could be used to implement preventive and management practices. This analysis would be useful for relevant authorities of the aviation industry responsible for managing bird strike risk at their airfields.

3.2 REVIEW OF LITERATURE

Birds are serious threat to aviation, particularly near airports (Thorpe,

2003). Bird aircraft collisions have resulted in loss of human lives and damage to aircraft recording 54 fatal accidents from 1912 to 2010, killing 276 people and destroying 108 civil aircraft (Thorpe, 2010). Allan and Orosz, (2001) have estimated that bird strikes annually cost commercial carriers over US$ 1.2 billion worldwide from 1999-2000. Annual losses to US civil aviation due to wildlife strikes (98 percent involving birds) have been estimated to at least $ 677 million (Dolbeer et al., 2011).

Richardson and West, (2000) have reported loss of 283 military aircraft and 141 human lives in fewer number of western nations from 1959 to 1999.

Not all bird strikes result in crashes; however, they may cause structural and mechanical damage to the aircraft. These strikes can also generate indirect costs like fuel used, transportation of different parts, accommodation of passengers, downtime

cost of damaged aircraft etc. Available information shows that flight delay cost can run as high as US $ 15,000 per hour. Data compiled by Federal Aviation

Administration USA supports the fact that indirect costs exceed four times the direct cost.(www.tc.gc.ca/CivilAviation/AerodromeAirNav/Standards/WildlifeControl/tp1

3549/menu.htm-58).

Complete; reliable and detailed analysis of bird strike data provides essential information on identification of problem and help to explore hidden trends in the data set (Allan et al., 1999). Available data is collected and analyzed in order to understand the extent of existing and past problems related to bird strikes. Following the bird strike data reporting procedures as mentioned in Manual on ICAO Bird Strike

Information System (IBIS) (Doc. 9332-AN.909) airstrikes in Pakistan, are identified by bird strike reporting form (CAAF-002-SBXX-1.0). It also indicates strikes with or without damage. These records generate valuable information on the bird hazard level at the airports including details on; kind of aircraft, bird species, seasonal pattern, time of bird-aircraft collisions and economic losses, if any (Cleary et al., 1999). Some broader conclusions could also be drawn from the available data, and as more data is collected, the predictions and estimates are further refined to explore true level of the bird hazards (Allan et al., 1999).

Several studies have been conducted to analyse civilian and military bird strike data bases all over the world (Dolbeer and Eschenfelder, 2003; Allan et al.,

1999). However, the major difficulty faced by these researchers in understanding the available data, arose from incomplete and incorrect sourcing being presented by

different institutions (Allan et al., 1999) or there does not exist any analysis of bird strike data available with relevant agencies or organisations responsible for management of airports and their operations. Such deficiencies provide a good reason to review and analyse available bird strike data of major airports, with an objective to generate some basic information Cleary and Dolbeer, (1999).

There are various biotic and abiotic factors which influence bird strikes with aviation. Gabrey and Dolbeer, (1996) studied rainfall effects on bird aircraft collision at two United States airports and found that presence of standing water from rainfall did not increase the probability of strike at JFK airport. However, at O‟Hare airport there was evidence that standing water increased the strike rates. Detail and long term data on daily bird aircraft collision, rainfall, and bird use of standing water are needed from other airports so that a more comprehensive analysis could be done.

3.3 MATERIALS AND METHODS

3.3.1 Data Collection

The bird strike data of PAF Base Nur Khan for fourteen year period

(1999-2012) was supplied by Pakistan Air Force, Air Head Quarters, Islamabad.

Another set of bird strike data of BBIA, Islamabad for eight year period (2005-2012) was provided by the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) Pakistan. CAA data was more comprehensive in terms of number of species, type of species, time of strike, type of aircraft involved and extent of damage. This information was kept confidential in

Pakistan Air Force data of Nur Khan Base.

3.3.2 Data Analysis

For preliminary analysis, data were entered into Microsoft Excel format.

The descriptive statistics was applied to determine their means, standard deviations, standard errors (S.E). The frequency distribution of monthly and annual bird strike number are also given for comparison. Then the data were arranged on yearly basis to find out total number of bird strikes during the year.

For seasonal analysis, bird strike data of both the agencies i.e. Nur Khan

Base and BBIA were combined, as the airfield is shared between the Nur Khan

Base (PAF) and BBIA (CAA). Seasonal analysis of bird strike data was done by segregating the data into five seasons i.e. winter (November to February), spring

(March-April), summer (May-June), monsoon (July-August) and fall

(September-October). Five variables that were tested included, winter, spring, summer, monsoon and fall. Homogeneity of variances was checked by using the

Levene‟s test. On the basis of results of levene‟s test, Kruskal-Wallis test was applied, which is a non parametric test used to compare difference between numbers of bird strikes occurring in all five seasons. Mann-Whitney U test was employed to observe difference between any two seasonal groups. Mean values given in the text are mentioned with standard error (Mean ± S.E), P < 0.01 and P < 0.05 were considered to indicate a statistically significant difference. SPSS 17 was used for seasonal analysis of data. I explored the relationship between climatic factors

(maximum and minimum temperatures and rainfall) and the bird-aircraft collisions by using Pearson‟s correlation.

Data were also subjected to regression analysis in order to explore the future trend in bird strikes at BBIA. For estimation of trend and growth in bird strikes, log- linear model was used.

 log(Y)= Natural log of annual bird strikes (dependent variable)

 a= intercept

 b= slope (rate of change)

 t= time

3.4 RESULTS

3.4.1 Bird Strike Data Analysis of Nur Khan Base, PAF (1999-2012)

Fourteen year (1999-2012) bird strike data obtained from the records of

Pakistan Air Force (PAF) for Nur khan Airbase, Rawalpindi is presented in Table 4.1.

In total 251 bird strikes were recorded. Average annual rate of bird strike was 17.9 ±

1.1. Maximum numbers of strikes (24) were observed in 2003 and 2005. Minimum number of strikes (9) was recorded in 2002. Except for four years 2000, 2002, 2008 and 2009 the strike rate remained above 16 in all fourteen years. The strike rate remained 20 and above in five years, 2001, 2003, 2004, 2005 and 2011 indicating intensity of the issue.

Analysis of the data on the basis of bird strikes occurring during day and night times revealed that the mean number of bird strikes during day time were 12.9

± 2.7 (S.E) as compared to 5.1 ± 2.8 (S.E) at night time. Maximum number of strikes,

recorded during day time was 16 during 2005 and 2006. Minimum number of strikes (8) was observed during day time in the year 2002. Similarly, maximum number of strikes recorded during night time was 10 in the year 2003. Minimum number of strikes (1) was observed during day in the year 2002 (Fig. 3.1).

3.4.2 Bird Strike Data Analysis of BBIA, CAA (2005-2012)

The eight year (2005-2012) record of bird strikes occurred at BBIA,

Islamabad, Pakistan, provided by CAA is summarized in Table 3.2. Analysis showed that annual average numbers of bird strikes were 8.3 ± 5.0 (S.E). Mean number of bird strikes recorded during daylight hours were 7.6 ± 4.8 (S.E) compared to 0.75±1.03 (S.E) occurring at night. Year-wise distribution of day and night bird strikes recorded at BBIA (CAA) from 2005 to 2012 is given in Fig. 3.2. Night time strikes were observed in four out of eight years, with maximum strikes occurring in the year 2008. The available data was unable to give any clue on bird species during night strikes, either surely related to birds (possibly owls) or mammals (presumably bats).

3.4.3 Combined Analysis of Bird strike Data of BBIA, CAA and PAF Base

Nur Khan (2005-2012)

Eight years‟ (2005-2012) combined (CAA and PAF base Nur Khan) bird strike data of BBIA Islamabad is presented in (Fig. 3.3) and (Table 3.3). In total 213 bird strikes were recorded with annual mean number of bird strikes 26.62 ± 2.11

(S.E) (Table 3.4). Maximum numbers of strikes (39) were reported in 2011 and minimum (20) in 2009. Except for the year 2009, the strike rate remained above 20 during rest of seven years (Fig 3.3).

Table 3.1: Monthly records of bird strike incidences (1999 to 2012) at PAF Base Nur Khan, Rawalpindi

Months Years

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Total Jan 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 2 1 7 Feb 2 3 1 0 1 2 1 0 0 0 1 2 0 1 14 March 1 2 2 0 0 2 0 0 1 0 3 3 2 2 18 April 0 0 1 1 3 0 3 2 1 2 2 2 1 2 20 May 2 0 1 2 2 3 2 2 2 1 1 1 6 1 26 June 2 2 0 0 2 0 4 1 0 1 0 2 0 2 16 July 2 2 4 2 0 2 3 2 3 2 2 1 1 0 26 Aug 3 1 1 0 4 3 3 2 2 1 1 3 0 3 27 Sep 1 2 6 1 3 3 2 4 3 1 2 1 3 2 34 Oct 1 1 1 2 7 3 1 3 5 2 2 1 3 3 35 Nov 1 1 2 0 1 2 3 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 14 Dec 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 1 0 2 0 14 Total 16 14 20 9 24 22 24 19 19 13 15 18 20 18 251

Table 3.2: Monthly records of bird strike incidences (2005 to 2012) at BBIA, Islamabad (CAA).

Month 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Total

Jan 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 3

Feb 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 2

March 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 3

April 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1

May 1 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 5

June 0 0 0 1 0 0 5 0 6

July 4 3 0 0 1 3 3 1 15

Aug 0 0 1 0 1 2 4 2 10

Sep 1 1 4 1 1 1 3 0 12

Oct 0 0 1 1 0 2 2 0 6

Nov 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1

Dec 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 3

Total 6 4 6 11 5 11 19 5 67

3.4.4 Monthly and Seasonal Distribution of Bird Strike Data of BBIA

Analysis of the data on the basis of bird strikes occurring during each month of all eight years (2005-2012) is given in (Fig. 3.4) and seasonal distribution of bird strikes is given in (Fig. 3.5). It could be noted that bird strikes remained low during winters (Nov-Feb) gradually increased in spring (March-April) and summer

(May-June) and peaked in monsoon (July-August) and fall (Sep-Oct). Gradual increase in bird strike number is clearly observed from winters to spring than in summers and this number peaks during monsoon and fall (Table 3.4).

Preliminary data analysis revealed, that mean monthly bird strikes were 1.12 ±

0.34 (S.E) in winters (Nov- Dec- Jan-Feb), 1.87 ± 0.79 (S.E) in spring (Mar-Apr),

2.31 ± 0.65 (S.E) in summer (May-Jun), 3.37 ± 0.58 (S.E) in monsoon and 3.5 ±

0.63 (S.E) in fall (Sep-Oct) (Fig. 3.5) (Table 3.4). The trend indicated that seasonal factors may influence number of bird strikes.

3.4.5 Seasonal Analysis of Bird Strike Data of BBIA

In order to calculate any statistical difference in number of bird strikes in each season, seasonal analysis was done. The results of levene‟s test showed that variances were significantly different (p < 0.05). So I used a non-parametric, median based test, Kruskal Wallis test instead of ANOVA. The results showed significant difference between number of bird strikes occurring in all five seasons (p

< 0.01) with a mean rank of 8.44 for winter, 17.12 for spring, 19.00 for summer,

29.31 for monsoon and 28.62 for fall. To observe any further difference between any two seasons, Mann Whitney U test was used. Results showed statistically significant difference (p < 0.05) in number of bird strikes occurring during monsoon and spring,

Day Night

18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2

0 No.ofbird strikesduring day/night

Year

Fig. 3.1: Number of bird strike occurred during day and night times at PAF Base

Nur Khan, Pakistan (1999-2012)

day caa night caa

20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 No.of Bird Strkesduring No.ofBird day/night 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Year

Fig. 3.2: Records of bird strikes occurred during day and night time at BBIA,

Islamabad (CAA) Pakistan.

Table 3.3: Yearly and monthly records (2005 to 2012) of bird strike incidences at (CAA, PAF) BBIA, Islamabad.

Month Year

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Total

Jan 1 1 0 1 0 2 3 1 9

Feb 1 0 0 0 2 2 0 2 7

March 0 0 1 1 4 3 3 2 14

April 3 2 1 2 2 3 1 2 16

May 3 2 2 5 1 1 6 1 21

June 4 1 0 2 0 2 5 2 16

July 7 5 3 2 3 4 4 1 29

Aug 3 2 3 1 2 5 4 5 25

Sep 3 5 7 2 3 2 6 2 30

Oct 1 3 6 3 2 3 5 3 26

Nov 3 1 0 2 0 1 0 1 8

Dec 1 1 2 3 1 1 2 1 12

Total 30 23 25 24 20 29 39 23 213

30 29 25 23 24 23

20 No ofbird No strikes

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Year

Fig 3.3: Number of bird strike at BBIA, Islamabad (2005-2012)

15 No ofbird No strikes 10

Month

Fig. 3.4: Monthly distribution of bird strikes at BBIA, Islamabad (2005-2012)

monsoon and winter (p < 0.01), spring and fall (p < 0.05), spring and winter (p < 0.05), summer and fall (p < 0.05) and fall and winter (p < 0.01). However, non-significant difference was found between numbers of bird strikes occurring in spring and summer

(p > 0.05), summer and monsoon (p > 0.05), spring and winter (p > 0.05) spring and summer (p < 0.05) and monsoon and summer (p >0.05). The significant difference in number of bird strikes in different seasons could be attributed to the correlation between meteorological factors and bird strikes and also to the behavior and breeding biology of birds. Non-significant difference was found in number of bird strikes occurring during winter and spring, spring and summer, and summer and monsoon. This could be due to the reason that these seasons have no sharp and distinct boundary in between.

3.4.6 Correlation between Bird Strikes and Met Data

Effects of three climatic factors, i.e. maximum and minimum temperature and rainfall on bird strikes are shown in Fig. 3.6, Fig. 3.7 and Fig. 3.8, respectively by regression analysis. Furthermore, a significantly positive correlation was also found between bird strikes and maximum temperature (r = 0.452, P < 0.01). Similarly an increasing trend in number of bird strikes was observed with rise in minimum temperature, significant positive correlation was found between minimum temperature and bird strikes. (r = 0.422, P < 0.01). Results also revealed that rainfall was also positively correlated with bird strikes (r = 0.242, P < 0.01).

Relationship between bird strike and mean maximum, minimum temperature and rainfall during (2005-2012) is also shown in Fig. 3.9 and Fig. 3.10.

Table 3.4: Seasonal mean monthly bird strike incidences from 2005-12 at BBIA, Islamabad and Nur Khan Base (CAA and PAF)

Year Season Months 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Total

Nov 3 1 0 2 0 1 0 1 8

Dec 1 1 2 3 1 1 2 1 12

Winter Jan 1 1 0 1 0 2 3 1 9 Feb 1 0 0 0 2 2 0 2 7

Total 6 3 2 6 3 6 5 5 36

Mean ± S.E 1.12 ± 0.34

March 0 0 1 1 4 3 3 2 14

Spring April 3 2 1 2 2 3 1 2 16 Total 3 2 2 3 6 6 4 4 30

Mean ± S.E 1.87±0.79

Summer May 3 2 2 5 1 1 6 1 21

June 4 1 0 2 0 2 5 2 16

Continued

Table:3.4 Page 2

Year Season Months Total 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

Mean ± S.E 2.31±0.65

Monsoon July 7 5 3 2 3 4 4 1 29

Aug 3 2 3 1 2 5 4 5 25

Total 10 7 6 3 5 9 8 6 54

Mean ± S.E 3.37±0.58

Fall Sep 3 5 7 2 3 2 6 2 30 Oct 1 3 6 3 2 3 5 3 26

Total 4 8 13 5 5 5 11 5 56

Mean ± S.E 3.5±0.63

Total 30 23 25 24 20 29 39 23 213

Mean annual bird strikes ± S.E 26.62±2.11

4.5

3.5

2.5

1.5

Meanmonthly bird strikes 1

0.5

0 winter spring summer monsoon fall Seasons

Fig. 3.5: Mean monthly distribution of bird strikes in all five seasons at BBIA,

Islamabad (2005-2012) (values represent mean ± S.E)

Y=-0.89+0.107( T)

Fig. 3.6: Effect of maximum temperature on bird strikes at BBIA (2005-12).

(Y= -0.89+0.107(max. temp) P<0.01)

Y=0.882+0.86(T )

Fig.3.7: Effect of minimum temperature on bird strikes at BBIA (2005-12).

(Y=0.882+0.86(Min. temp) P<0.01)

Y=1.868+0.003(R)

Fig. 3.8: Effect of rainfall on bird strikes at BBIA (2005-12).

Y=1.868+0.003(Rainfall) P<0.01

Mean Bird Strike

Mean Minimum Temperature (°C) Mean Maximum Temperature (°C) 50 40 30 20

Max. and Min. temp. temp. (C) and Max. Min. 10

Mean No of Bird Strikes, mean mean Strikes, No Bird Mean of 0 Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct months

Fig 3.9: Relationship between bird strike and mean maximum and minimum

temperature at BBIA, Islamabad.

Rainfall (mm) Mean Bird Strike 350 35 300 30

250 25

200 20 150 15

100 10 rainfall ( mm) ( rainfall 50 5 0 0

Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Mean No of bird Strikes and mean and Strikes No mean birdMean of months

Fig 3.10: Relationship between bird strike and rainfall at BBIA, Islamabad

3.4.7 Regression Analysis

Results of regression analysis run on fourteen year PAF bird strike data of the year (1999-2012) are given in (Table 3.5 and Fig. 3.11). Value of regression coefficient (0.10) depicted that bird strikes were nominally increasing over the period of time. The results of log linear model (Table 3.6) indicated that the bird strikes at

Nur Khan Airbase has positive trend. However the increase is insignificant (0.95 percent from 1999 to 2012).Regression coefficient (0.9) of CAA data also indicated an increased trend in bird strikes at BBIA during (2005-2012) (Table 3.5) (Fig

3.12). Bird strikes were increasing at an average annual growth of 8.9 percent at

BBIA from 2005 to 2012 (Table 3.6).

Bird strike rate when calculated by combining both the data sets of PAF airbase Nur Khan and BBIA (2005-2012) also showed a positive regression coefficient (0.46) which indicated an increasing trend in bird strikes (Table 3.5).

However, the results of log linear model on combined data of (PAF Base Nur

Khan and BBIA) showed positive trend (1.24 percent from 2005 to 2012) (Table

3.6) (Fig. 3.13). Negligible increase in bird strike has been noted in PAF bird strike data and in combined data. Data showed fluctuations in bird strikes between the years which range from (0.95-1.24 percent).

3.4.8 Species Involved in Bird strikes at BBIA

Analysis of bird strike data of BBIA Islamabad (2005-2012) of civil aircraft also revealed that in 57 percent of strikes, species remained unknown. The daily time based analysis of data showed that 52 percent of all strikes took place

Table 3.5: Regression Analysis on bird strike data of BBIA (PAF, CAA and Combined

data)

Regression PAF Nur Khan BBIA (CAA) CAA PAF combined analysis (1999-2012) (2005-2012) data (2005-2012)

n 14 8 8

Regression Log(Y) = -189.23+ Log(Y)= Log(Y) = -905.89 + equation 0.10t -1832.75+0.91t 0.46t

R² 0.010 0.196 0.036

P 0.72 0.27 0.651

Number of bird strikes Linear (Number of bird strikes) 30 Y= -189. 23 + 0.10 t 2

25 R = 0.010 p = 0.72 20

Numberofbird strikes 5

0 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 year

Fig. 3.11: Bird strike trend in PAF data (1999-2012) of Nur Khan Base

number of bird strikes Linear (number of bird strikes) 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4

Number strikes bird of Number 2 0 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 Year

Fig. 3.12: Bird strike trend in CAA data (2005-2012) of BBIA, Islamabad

Bird Strike Linear (Bird Strike) 45 40 35 30 25 20

Bird Strike Bird 15 10 5 0 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 Year

Fig. 3.13: Bird strike trend in (CAA and PAF combined data) of BBIA, Islamabad.

Table 3.6: Annual growth rate of bird strike at BBIA by Log Linear Model

BBIA, Nur Khan Log-Linear PAF Nur Khan BBIA (CAA) (Combined data) Model (1999-2012) (2005-2012) (2005-2012) n 14 8 8

Regression Log (Y) = Log (Y) = Log(Y) = equation -1.6.28+0.0095 X -178.4+0.089 X -21.68+0.012 X

R² 0.022 0.171 0.0213

P 0.607 0.307 0.72

Annual growth rate 0.95% 8.98% 1.24% in bird strike

between 5 to 8 am; 16 percent between 9 to 11 am.am,10 percent between 12 to

17 pm and 13 percent between 17 to 20 pm and 5 percent between 20 to 21 pm.

Analysis of data with respect to known bird species revealed that bird of prey mainly

(kites) were the major bird species involved in the strikes. In total, 17 cases of kite strike were reported. Monthly distribution of number of kites, during this eight year period showed that relatively more kite strikes occurred during the months of June,

July and August. There was no evidence or identification of this bird collision in winter (November through January) or (April-May) spring months (2005-2012) (Fig.

3.14).

Each group of small and medium sized birds (including pigeons, as categorized by CAA) was found to be responsible for 14 percent of the collisions

(Fig. 3.15). About 30 percent of all bird strikes resulted into some scale of damage to civil aircraft (Fig 3.16). Analysis of damage by parts suggested that in 92 percent cases damage occurred to engines followed by windshields with 8 percent

(Fig.3.17).

3.4.9 Type of Aircraft

The data provided some clue to type of aircraft involved in bird strikes.

Airbus A-310 accounted for 36 percent, Boeing B-373 for 19 percent, Boeing B-777 and ATR (Aerei da Trasporto Regionale French-Italian made aircraft) 10 percent each, Boeing B-747 for 5 percent, Airbus A-300, A-319, A-320, A-321 and A-332 two percent each (Fig. 3.18).

9 8

6 5 4

3 No of kites struck kites of No 2 1 0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Months

Fig. 3.14: Monthly distribution of kites struck at BBIA, Islamabad during

(2005-2012)

small birds medium sized 14% bird 7% pigeon 7%

raptors 72%

Fig. 3.15: Percentage distribution of birds involved in bird strikes at BBIA,

Islamabad (2005-2012)

raptors 31%

unidentified 57% pigeon 3% medium sized small birdsbird 6% 3%

Fig. 3.15a: Percentage distribution of strikes with identified and unidentified birds'

types responsible for collision with aircraft at BBIA

accidents with damage 30%

accidents with no damage 70%

Fig 3.16: Percentage distribution of damage to aircraft recorded at BBIA,

Islamabad, Islamabad (2005-2012)

Damage Engine wind shield

92%

Fig 3.17: Percentage distribution of damage by parts of aircraft, at BBIA, Islamabad

(2005-2012)

ATR-5 ATR-42 2% 5% F-27 2% ATR 10% A-310 36% B-777 10%

B-737 19% B-747 5%

A-300 3% A-320 A-332 A-321 2% A-319 2% 2% 2%

Fig. 3.18: Type of aircraft involved in bird strikes, at BBIA, Islamabad (2005-2012)

3.5 DISCUSSION

Average annual number of bird strikes at Nur Khan Base PAF, was more than average annual number of bird strikes occurring with civil aircraft at BBIA. Zakrajsek and Bissonette, (2005) are of the view that military flight characteristics are different from those of civilian flights, mainly for high speed and low level flying (Mc Cracken,

1976). Bird strikes occurring during daylight hours at BBIA were more than strikes at night time. These findings were in agreement with Dolbeer (2006). More number of bird strikes in daylight hours could be attributed to the presence and activity of common diurnal bird species found in the vicinity of the airfield and lower number of night strikes could be associated with less number of birds or presence of bats or nocturnal bird species in air at night. This rise in number of bird strikes at day time could also be attributed to more number of training flights at day time. In our data analysis on average 71.6 percent of the total bird strikes occurred during daylight hours and 28.3 percent strikes happened at night. In an analysis of the bird strikes to

Ex-Soviet Union Air Force in East Germany, Jacoby (1998) has also reported that on average, all night collisions consisted 26.3 percent of the total bird strikes.

However, Neubauer (1990) stated that in the USAF 17 percent of bird strikes took place at night and 5 percent in day time, which is less than the current records at Nur

Khan Base PAF, Pakistan.

Our seasonal analysis revealed that aircraft were more prone to bird strikes in monsoon (Jul-Aug) and in fall (Sep-Oct), with maximum bird strikes occurring in the month of September then in July followed by October and August. This could be attributed to the fledging of inexperienced young kites and other birds in the vicinity

of the airfield. A study by Küsters‟ and Scheller, (1998) on bird strikes with military aircraft and flight altitudes of raptors in Germany also confirms that Kestrels (almost exclusively recently fledged birds) were involved mainly in strikes occurring in summers (July-September). On the other hand, raptors flying high using thermal currents, showed two peaks, the first one from March to May and the second from

July to September. Studies by Küsters‟ and Scheller, (1998) have shown that good thermals in spring or in August and September are positively correlated with flight height, thus increasing the risk of bird strike. In an analysis of bird strikes in United

States, Wang (2010) also reported that bird strike keep increasing in May and arrives its peak value in August, the bird strike kept its high value in September and dropped to a very low value in December. These results are in agreement with our findings.

Observations recorded on species density (Chapter 5) also revealed that breeding cycle of kites, fledging of young birds from their nests in the months of

May-June, and availability of plenty of food during the monsoon period (Jul-Aug) could be one of the reasons for increased strike rate during this period. Kites have been observed feeding on frogs, rats and other animals too. It may also be presumed that thermal activity associated with the kite behaviour could be a key risk issue.

Similarly it has been reported by McCracken (1976) in an analysis of past bird strike data of United States Air Force, that twice a year during spring (April, May) and fall (August, September, October, November) bird strike rate increased significantly. Dolbeer (1998) also reported that months of July to October, especially

August, were the months with highest strike rate below 152 m, probably due to the addition of large number of recently fledged birds.

According to Burger (1985), Kelly et al. (2001) young birds are less skillful than older birds at avoiding aircraft. In our study, less numbers of strikes were observed during winter season (Nov-Feb). This could again be related with the breeding cycle of kites (Roberts, 1991). This is the period when female build nests

(Nov-Dec) lay and hatch eggs (Jan-Mar) and remain sitting in their nests most of the time, till eggs are hatched (Mar-May) and young ones leave their nests

(Jun-Aug) (Roberts, 1991).

Local climatic conditions do have an effect on bird strikes frequency

(Manktelow, 2000). Significant correlation was found between bird strikes and maximum and minimum temperature and rainfall. High temperature may encourage birds of prey, mainly involved in bird strikes, to soar high up in the air

(Küsters‟ and Scheller, 1998) or these birds may come to the runways to sunbath

(Manktelow, 2000). In our study kites have also been observed to soar high up in the air, in the vicinity of BBIA. Previous studies (Gabrey and Dolbeer, 1996) have shown that rainfall also induce conditions that lead to increase in bird strikes. In our findings a positive correlation was found between rainfall and bird strikes. Highest numbers of bird strikes were observed during monsoon (Jul-Aug) and fall (Sep- Oct).

Average rainfall value of this period (in July 266.73 mm, in August 305.33 mm and in

September 147.7 mm) was also significantly (p < 0.01) higher than from other periods. These results support the view that rainfall may influence the bird strike incidents. This could be attributed to the availability of more food to birds on rainy days, as worms and other soil invertebrate may come to the surface in wet season

(Allan and Watson, 1990).

Bird strike trend is increasing worldwide, in recent years (Thorpe, 2010).

These incidents are increasing with the development of air industry and increase in air traffic at global level (Cleary and Dolbeer, 2005). Different reasons as explained by different studies include that modern aircraft with high speed and low noise are more prone to bird strikes as compared to old model piston powered noisy and slow aircraft (Cleary and Dolbeer, 1999). Another reason as suggested by (Dolbeer,

2000) is increase in aircraft operations as well as rise in population of hazardous species. A nominal increasing trend (0.95 percent) in bird strike data (1999-2012) was observed at Nur Khan Airbase, PAF and in combined bird strike data (2005-2012) of

PAF and CAA (1.24 percent). However, 8.9 percent increase in bird strikes was observed at BBIA (CAA). This could be attributed to increased air traffic over the years (according to Pakistan Civil Aviation Authority, 23,436 aircraft movements were recorded at BBIA in 2004-2005, while 34,025 aircraft movements were reported during the year 2008-2009 or rise in population of hazardous birds in the vicinity of the airport

Occurrence of bird strikes at BBIA could be attributed to the presence/activity of common urban area bird species found in the vicinity of the airfield. These species mainly include kite (Milvus migrans), house crow (Corvus splendens), common myna (Acridotheres tristis), house sparrow (Passer domesticus), dove (Zenaida macroura) feral pigeon (Columba livia) as recorded by our own observation and also reported by the airport authority. These bird species were found to be attracted to rich feeding, roosting and nesting places at and around

Islamabad International Airport. Dolbeer (2006) has reported in an analysis of the

National Wildlife Strike database of Civil Aviation in the US that for strikes at <

152 m, passerines, gulls and terns, pigeon and doves and raptors were the identified species group most frequently struck. A variety of bird species are reported to be involved in bird strikes for example Dolbeer et al. (1993) had recorded at least 56 species of birds struck by aircraft at JFK International Airport, New York, from

1979-1992. Our CAA data analysis revealed that birds of prey (kite and eagle) belonging to Accipitriformes were involved in 72 percent, of 43 percent of the reported strikes, where species were identified. Kites constituted 59 percent, and eagles accounted for 13 percent of these strikes. All strikes with kites were recorded during day time. Birds of prey usually soar at higher altitudes using thermal currents, and are thus most likely to be struck with aircraft travelling at greater velocity, resulting in greater damage (Buurma and Dekker, 1996).

Analysis of civil aircraft data of BBIA on the basis of parts of aircraft damaged revealed that engine damage was evident in 92 percent of the accidents followed by windshield penetration in 8 percent of the accidents. Previous studies by

Thorpe (2003, 2005 and 2010) also reported that major threat (77 percent of accidents) to airlines and executive jet is engine ingestion. Our results are also in agreement with these studies.

I found A-310 were involved in most of the bird strike cases, this could be attributed to wide body of this aircraft allowing more surface area for strike, in contrast to Boeing having an narrow body. Placement of engine in these two types of aircraft could be one of the reasons adding to more number of accidents.

Information drawn by this study could be incorporated into bird hazard management plan of the airfield. Bird strike rate of PAF base Nur Khan is more than that of BBIA (CAA). On the basis of seasonal fluctuations in bird strikes management efforts could be intensified during periods, having high bird strikes rate i.e. monsoon (July and August) and fall (September and October). More resources could be allocated for these particular months. An increasing trend in bird strikes, though not significant, was observed both at BBIA and PAF Base Nur

Khan over the period of time with varying growth rate. A critical action needed to be done by the airport authorities, is to maintain records systematically and to identify species correctly, so that bird behavioral oriented management practices may be implemented. As CAA and PAF collect more precise data on bird strikes it will be possible to produce more refined analysis.

Chapter 4

HABITAT SURVEY FOR RECOGNIZING BIRD

ATTRACTANTS

4.1 INTRODUCTION

Aerodrome standards and recommended practices mentioned in chapter 9;

Annex 14, of International Civil Aviation Organization, states that presence of birds and other animals on and in the vicinity of an aerodrome is a serious safety concern.

It also stresses upon the need of collection of information on the prevalence of wildlife on or around the aerodrome, constituting a potential hazard to aircraft operations. Reconnaissance survey carried out initially, within 8-10 km radius of

BBIA Islamabad revealed that there were many bird attracting sites in the vicinity of this airport. As habitat analysis provides a framework, by which more site specific observations could be obtained, the current study was conducted to explore attributes and attractants of each selected site which cause bird assemblage.

4.2 REVIEW OF LITERATURE

According to CAA Pakistan, bird activity around airports is due to bird attraction sites such as butcheries, slaughter houses, poultry farms, marriage halls, open air restaurants, tannery, fish drying areas, cattle yards, stagnant water, rain water, drain (filled with wild growth & dirty water) and garbage dumps. The actions of CAA to combat bird strike hazards are covered under national legislation namely, the Aircraft Removal of Danger to Safety Ordinance, 1965 and Civil

Aviation Rules, 71 and 103 of 1994, issued by Government of Pakistan Ministry

of Defense (Defense Division) Aviation Wing, Rawalpindi. According to the ordinance “no person shall leave waste foodstuffs on, or bring waste foodstuffs onto an area of land to which this rule applies”. For the purpose of this rule: "area of land" means the area of land lying within a radius of 8 km from either end of a runway at an aerodrome; and "waste foodstuffs" includes other waste substances attractive to birds.

Different studies have been conducted at and around the airfields to assess the attractiveness of habitats for bird species. Matthew et al.(1998) in a survey of the aerodromes of Trivandrum, Cochin, Calicut, Manglore and Ramnad, India found that habitat around those aerodromes had many attractants such as animal waste, garbage and other food items which attracted large number of kites (Milvus migrans) near these aerodromes.

Servoss et al. (2000) explored the habitat characteristics, in relation to wildlife use pattern, of Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport, in US, and recommended that removal of attractants such as food, water and shelter would reduce the species in the surrounding habitat. In Himalayan Kingdom of Nepal,

Tribhuvan International Airport (TIA), situated in a valley, had the rapidly growing urban habitat around its airfield. It offered many sites which attracted bird species including raptors. Polluted rivers, shops, markets and poor sanitation conditions were factors which attracted hazardous bird species in the vicinity of the aerodrome (Upadhyaya and Dolbeer, 2001).

4.3 MATERIALS AND METHODS

4.3.1 Site Description

In order to explore land use practices in relation to bird population and bird use pattern it was important to characterize habitat at and in the vicinity of BBIA,

Islamabad. Habitat survey was conducted following Servoss et al. (2000). Data were collected from eight selected study sites, located in the vicinity of the airport within 8-10 km radius. The habitat of each study site was assessed on the basis of presence of agricultural activity, commercial and recreational land use, waste management, water sources, nesting, loafing, roosting and feeding area

(Cleary and Dolbeer, 1999). These sites were chosen to sample key habitats around

BBIA, Islamabad. Sites 1 and 2 located in the northwest direction of the airport represented commercial habitats, site 3 symbolized naturally preserved area, site

4 was taken as an area with buildings having old pine and eucalyptus plantation, site 5 was marked to indicate habitat around a water body i.e. Soan river, site 6 represented sports ground, site 7 represented landfill area for solid waste disposal adjacent to airport boundary and site 8 represented an area with well planned housing colonies and proper garbage disposal system. Aircraft were observed taking flight routes over all selected study sites. However, at site 6 and site 7 which fall exactly under landing route of aircraft were below 152 m.

4.3.2 Data Collection

Though, all sites were different in size, however, a vantage point was selected at each study site and observations were recorded in 50 m radius

(Verner, 1985). Each site was visited monthly during the year 2013-14. Most of the

observations were made between 6:00 am to 19:30 pm. Habitat remained same throughout the study period, except rise in water level in the water bodies and blooming vegetation in spring and during monsoon season. Vegetation present at each study site was also recorded. Samples of unknown plant species were collected which were then identified by the Department of Forestry and Range

Management, PMAS- Arid Agriculture University, Rawalpindi.

4.3.3 Species Identification

All birds seen at each survey site were recorded. Binoculars were used to identify questionable birds and to verify species. Identification of bird species was done initially following books i.e. Birds of Pakistan, 2 volumes by Roberts (1991) and Roberts (1992), field guides of Birds of Pakistan (Mirza, 2007), Birds of

Islamabad (Pyhala, 2001) and by consulting ornithologist from National History

Museum, WWF (Pakistan) and PMAS - Arid Agriculture University, Rawalpindi.

4.3.4 Scoring Data Sheets

Scoring data sheets were obtained from Manual on Wildlife Hazard

Management at Airport, USDA (Cleary and Dolbeer, 1999). These data sheets were used to score habitat type of each study site, against each parameter, scoring ranged from 0-3. (Annex 1).

4.3.5 Habitat Index

Habitat Index (HI) for each study site was calculated using following equation:

( ) Habitat index = HI ( ) ( )

Then, Habitat Composite Index (HCI) was calculated using following equation :

( ) Habitat Composite Index (HCI) ∑ ( ) ( )

Where Xi= base value

X i (min) = minimum score value in the respective habitat

X i (max) = maximum score value in the respective habitat

∑

4.4 RESULTS

Results of habitat survey carried out for recognizing bird attractants at each site during 2011 are given below

4.4.1 Site 1 (Mall road)

Site 1 was located at the Mall road, Rawalpindi Cantt, at the distance of about 4.5 km in northwest direction of BBIA. The area was marked by the presence of a four star hotel Shalimar, a five star hotel; Pearl Continental (PC), Signal‟s

Mess, Armor Mess, a small public park (Sarwar Park), mosques, hospitals, banks and a petrol pump. These hotels and messes had swimming pools, wedding halls, huge lawns and open areas for outdoor eatings and barbecues Street light poles, telephone towers, overhead cables, sign boards, billboards were also located on

each side of the road. Two open medium sized (about one metric ton capacity) garbage dumps were also found at about 300 m distance from this site. Although,

Cantonment Board Rawalpindi trash lifter vehicle regularly transfers the garbage, however, garbage dumps were open and it remained over there for about one to two days.

During the study period, flocks of kites with average number of 50-60 birds were found hovering over the hotels located in site 1. Poles of street lights, telephone towers, billboards, sign boards and tall buildings were used as perching sites for these bird species. A strand of pine tree (Pinus roxburghii) present at

Signal‟s Mess adjacent to the boundary of this park served as roosting, nesting and perching sites for kites. An open garbage collection point, of capacity of about 1 ton solid waste, was located at the distance of about 20 m away from this public park.

Bird species and plant species present at this location are listed in Table 4 and Table

4.1 .Dominant tree species at this site were Pinus roxburghii, Cupressus sempervirens, Phoenix dactylifera, Eucalyptus camaldulensis. Commonly observed bird species here included kite (Milvus migrans), crow (Corvus splendens) common myna (Acridotheres tristis), dove (Streptopelia decaocto), sparrow (Passer domesticus) and Parakeet (Psittacula krameri). Kites, were observed sitting high on the boards and logos mounted at the top of these hotels. Lags of Pinus roxburghii and Dalbergia sisso, served as perching sites for birds. An unusual number of

500-600 kites were observed hovering over Pearl continental Hotel on 12th Sept.

2011. This type of clustering phenomenon were recorded especially when a dead carcass was available for eating.

4.4.2 Site 2 (Saddar)

Site 2 is located in the northwest of the airport at the distance of about 4 km and was marked by the presence of commercial area with banks, plazas, mosques, shopping malls, vacant lot, hotels, restaurants and open garbage dumps of solid waste. Commercial multistory buildings, towers, street lights, overhead cables were also used as perching site. Nearby trees were also used for roosting and nesting

Open garbage dumps present in this area provided feeding opportunity for kite, crow, myna and other birds. Bird species recorded in this area are given in Table 4.

4.4.3 Site 3 (Ayub Park)

Located at Jehlum road, at a distance of about 5 km in the southwest direction of the airport, this site was chosen to represent a naturally preserved recreational area called Ayub National Park previously known as Topi Rakh. The park covers an area of about 930 ha. It has open gardens, a lake with boating facility, restaurants with outdoor seating areas, Jungle Kingdom, animals in captivity, and recently a tract, for motorcycling is also established in the park. The park is rich in flora and avifauna (Table 4) and (Table 4.1).

Dominant tree species in this area were Eucalyptus camaldulensis,

Cupressus sempervirens, Pinus roxburghii, Ficus religiosa, Phoenix dactylifera,

Morus alba, and Dalbergia sisso. Dominated bird species recorded during the habitat survey were common myna (Acridotheres tristis), bulbul (Pycnonotus leucogeny), dove (Spilopelia senegalensis), pigeon (Columba livia), drongo (Dicrurus macrocercus), house crow (Corvus splendens) and kite (Milvus migrans). The site

offered nesting, roosting, perching, loafing and feeding places for these bird species. Presence of lakes, outdoor eating areas, food stalls also served as bird attractants.

4.4.4 Site 4 (Kachehri Chowk)

Located on the northwest side of the airport at a distance of about 4.5 km, the site is in the flight path of the aircraft. It is named after the city courts and is called

Kachehri chowk. The area is marked by the presence of Fatima Jinnah Women

University (old presidency building) on one side, Federal Board of Revenue office on the other side, Office of Commissioner, offices of District Courts, a bus stop, a mosque, some shops, restaurants, tea stalls and a petrol pump. Billboards, telephone poles, towers and buildings serve as perching sites for birds. Old tall pine trees were characteristic of locations like Fatima Jinnah Women University and

Punjab house in this vicinity. A contaminated stream from Nala Lai flows on backside of the Punjab House which also offers feeding opportunities to the scavenger birds.

This area was marked by high kite density. Roosts of kite, averaging 20-30 birds on each tree, were found nesting and perching on old, tall pine trees inside

Fatima Jinnah Women University and Punjab house throughout the year. In addition to kites, Nests of house crow were found on Eucalyptus and Dalbergia trees.

Perching sites also included billboards, telephone poles, towers and buildings a. Sites

3 and 4 showed highest score 3 for nesting, roosting, loafing and feeding opportunities for birds, especially for kites. Just lying at an aerial distance of 4.5 km

away from the airport, this area is a potential threat for aircraft operations.

4.4.5 Site 5 (Soan Birdge)

Site 5 located near Soan River was selected to represent habitats near water body. It was 6.5 km away from the airport in the southwest direction. Solid waste collected from the city is temporarily deposited underneath the Soan Bridge for later transfer to Losar dumping station near Rawat, Rawalpindi. Nurseries of ornamental plants and buffalo farming were recorded at the site. The area has sparse vegetation consisting of trees, shrubs, weeds. List of vegetation and bird species recorded at this site is given in Table 4 and Table 4.1. Bird problem at this site was mainly due to solid waste transfer station located underneath the Soan bridge and the nearby Soan River. A colony of house martin, of about 1500-2500 birds, was found underneath the Soan Bridge. Nests were made of mud in cup like structure.

There were swarms of mosquitoes in the area (probably the most abundant feeding resource available for martins). Other birds including kites (Milvus migrans), egrets

(Egretta alba), common myna (Acridotheres tristis) and crows (Corvus splendens) were observed exploiting feeding opportunities available at the dumping site.

4.4.6 Site 6 (Khan Research Laboratories, Cricket Stadium road)

Site 6 is located at an aerial distance of about 0.5 km in the northeast direction of the airport. On one side of it lies KRL cricket stadium. Open garbage dumps were recorded in the adjacent locality near eastern boundary of runway 30.

Refuse from nearby markets, shops, fruit and vegetables stalls and poultry shops offer plenty of feeding sources to birds. The grassy field of stadium and stand of

Eucalyptus (Eucalyptus camaldulensis) trees offered nesting and roosting areas for kite (Milvus migrans), common myna (Acridotheres tristis), and sparrow (Passer domesticus).

4.4.7 Site 7 (Runway 30 end)

Site 7 was located at the periphery of Shaheen Town across to the boundary wall of runway 30 end. It lies directly under the runway approaching site of aircraft.

The area served as landfill site for solid waste. The area was undulated, barren and had ditches. Solid waste was dumped in a trench of about 1 km length. A water channel (Nala) carrying waste water of Rawalpindi metropolitan passed through this area which was lined and was not causing any potential threat to the soil in the form of runoff and or erosion. However, it provided a feeding facility for scavenging birds. This landfill site was habitat for bird species like kite (Milvus migrans), house crow (Corvus splendens), egrets (Egretta alba), common myna

(Acridotheres tristis), beside these other smaller threats included wagtails

(Motacilla alba), black drongo (Dicrurus macrocercus) and house sparrow (Passer domesticus). The area is a potential threat for aircraft operation as it lies right under the landing site of the aircraft. Birds were seen to take immediate flight upwards from their feeding site upon hearing the landing thrust of aeroplanes. This situation could pose a threat to landing aircraft.

4.4.8 Site 8 (Bahria Town, Phase 8)

Site 8 was located in Bahria Town, which is 9 km away from the airport, in the southwest direction on the hilly contour of Pothwar plateau. The terrain is

undulating and river Soan borders the area. This site was taken to represent habitat with a well-planned modern housing society. A proper garbage disposal system is a distinctive feature of this locality. Vegetation covering the hilly area around this site is commonly called Phulai (Acacia modesta) Other plants species included

Pinus roxburghii most of which were newly planted with average height 2-3 m,

Phoenix dactylifera, Cupressus sempervirens, Acacia modesta ,Ficus religiosa and

Dalbergia sisso. Common bird species observed at this site were kite (Milvus migrans), house crow (Corvus splendens), sparrow (Passer domesticus) and common myna (Acridotheres tristis). Other species present are listed in Table 4.

Though there were restaurants, hotels, picnic areas and golf clubs, around this area but no significant bird problem was anticipated probably due to well managed trash transfer facility available at site 8. Covered trash bins were placed outside houses at site 8. Kites were found associated with tall trees or structure such as telephone towers or multistory buildings. However bird score of this site was minimum as compared to all other sites (Table 4.4)

4.4.9 Presence of Agriculture, Aquaculture, Livestock or Grain Storage

Facilities

Scoring for the presence of agriculture activity, aquaculture facility, and for grain mills is shown in (Table 4.3). It was observed that no potential threat was anticipated in any of these 8 selected study sites due to agricultural activity. Site 3 was scored 1 due to the presence of a natural lake in this area. The lake (though not used for fisheries and aquaculture) attracted some bird species like ducks (Anas platyrhynchos), coot (Fulica atra), moorhen (Gallinula chloropus), king fisher

(Alcedo atthis) and kite (Milvus migrans) because of having weeds, wild fish and amphibians in it, which served as food for these bird species. The site is located at an aerial distance of about 4.5 km from the airport. Although not all birds present at this site are hazardous like coot and moorhen, however, birds that fly high could pose potential threat to aircraft flying over this site.

4.4.10 Commercial and Recreational Land Use

Scoring of commercial and recreational land use practices, in relation to bird activity, of each study site is given in Table 4.3. Parameters scored in this category were presence of restaurants, hotels, picnic areas, golf course, sports ground and buildings used for nesting or perching purposes. Garbage and food waste from wedding halls, hotels‟ kitchens and leftovers provided ample feeding opportunities to bird species including kite (Milvus migrans), crow (Corvus splendens) and common myna (Acridotheres tristis).

4.4.11 Waste Management

Presence of garbage transfer station at site 7 just adjacent to runway 30 end (the landing site) and under Soan bridge at site 5, were the most threatening sites for their attractiveness to birds (Table 4.3). Many bird species including kite (Milvus migrans), crow (Corvus splendens) bank myna (Acridotheres ginginianus), common myna (Acridotheres tristis) and egrets (Egretta alba) were observed feeding at these areas. Open garbage dumps were observed not only in the close vicinity of the airport boundary but were also found everywhere in the city area (Table 2.4). The only site where waste disposal was managed properly was site 8 in Bahria Town.

Table 4: List of bird species recorded during habitat survey at each site in the vicinity of BBIA, Islamabad.

Sr.No. Order and Species 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Order Accipitriformes

1. Milvus migrans + + + + + + + +

2. Accipiter badius +

Order Passeriformes

3. Acridotheres tristis + + + + + + + +

4. Acridotheres ginginianus + + + + + + + +

5. Corvus splendens + + + + + + + +

6. Passer domesticus + + + + + + + +

7. Dicrurus macrocercus + + +

8. Cinnyris asiaticus + +

9. Pycnonotus cafer + + +

10. Pycnonotus leucogenys + + +

11. Motacilla cinerea + +

12. Motacilla alba + +

13. Delichon urbicum

14. Hirundo fluvicola +

Order Columbiformes

15. Columba livia + + + + + + + +

Continued

Table 4 Page 2

Sr.No Order and Species 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

16. Columba livia domestica + +

17. Streptopelia decaocto + + +

18. Spilopelia senegalensis + + +

Order Coraciiformes

19. Coracias benghalensis + +

20. Upupa epops + + +

21. Halcyon smyrnensis +

22. Alcedo atthis +

Order Psittaciformes

23. Psittacula krameri + + +

Order Gruiformes

24. Fulica atra +

25. Gallinula chloropus +

26. Apus affinis +

Order Anseriformes

27. Anas platyrhynchos +

Order Pelecaniformes

28. Ardeola grayii +

Order Cicconiiformes

Continued

Table 4 Page 3

Sr. Order and Species 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 No.

29. Egretta alba + + + +

30. Egretta Intermedia + + + +

Order Galliformes

31. Francolinus +

francolinus

32. Francolinus + pondicerianus

Order Cuculiformes

33. Cuculus canorus +

Order Charadriiformes

34. Charadrius dubius +

Table 4.1: List of plant species recorded at each site during habitat survey in the

vicinity of BBIA, Islamabad.

Sr.No Tree species Family 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

1. Eucalyptus Myrtaceae + + + + + + + + camaldulensis

2. Albizia lebbeck Fabaceae + + + + + + + +

3. Acacia modesta Fabaceae + + +

4. Acacia nilotica Fabaceae + +

5. Pongamia pinnata Fabaceae + +

6. Cassia fistula Fabaceae + +

7. Butea monosperma Fabaceae +

8. Dalbergia sisso Fabaceae + + + + +

9. Senegalia modesta Fabaceae + +

10. Bauhinia variegata Fabaceae +

11. Ficus elastica Moraceae + +

12. Ficus palmata Moraceae +

13. Ficus benghalensis Moraceae +

14. Morus macroura Moraceae +

15. Ficus religiosa Moraceae + + +

16. Ficus carica Moraceae +

Continued

Table 4.1 Page2

Sr.No Tree species Family 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

17. Ficus benjamina Moraceae + +

18. Cedrella toona Meliaceae +

19. Melia azedarach Meliaceae + +

20. Salix acmophylla Salicaceae +

21. Populus Salicaceae + euphratica

22. Populus nigra Salicaceae +

23. Pyrus communis Rosaceae

24. Malus pumila Rosaceae

25. Ailanthus Simaroubaceae + altissimia

26. Cupressus Cupressaceae + + + sempervirens

27. Pinus roxburghii Pinaceae + + + + +

28. Phoenix Arecaceae + + + dactylifera

29. Magifera indica Anacardiaceae

30. Musa sepientum Musaceae

31. Hyophorbe Palmae + + lagenicaulis

Continued

Table 4.1 Page 3

Sr.No Tree species Family 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

32. Zizyphus mauritiana Rhamnaceae +

33. Tamarix aphylla Tamaricaceae +

34. Syzygium cumini Myrtaceae

35. Sapium sebiferum Euphorbiaceae +

36. Salmalia malbarica Bombacaceae +

37. Punica granatum Lythraceae nana

38. Psidium guajava Myrtaceae

39. Jacaranda Bignoniaceae + + + mimosifolia

40. Grevillea robusta Proteaceae +

41. Olea ferruginea Oleaceae +

42. Cupressus glauca Cupressaceae + + + +

43. Callistemon citrinus Myrtaceae +

44. Acer saccharum Sapindaceae + +

45. Phoenix canariensis Arecaceae +

46. Citrus sinensis Rutaceae

47. Alstonia scholaris Apocynaceae + + +

48. Pterospermum Sterculiaceae + acerifolium

49. Araucaria araucana Araucariaceae + +

Continued

Table 4.1 Page 4

Sr.No Species Family 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Shrubs

50. Morus alba Moraceae + +

51. Broussonetia Moraceae + papyrifera

52. Punica granatum Punicaceae

53. Ricinus communis Euphorbiaceae

54. Helianthus annuus Asteraceae + +

55. Dodonaea viscose Sapindaceae +

56. Hibiscus rosa-sinensis Malvaceae + + +

57. Bouganvillea glabra Nyctaginaceae + + +

Grasses

58. Bambusa bambos Poaceae +

59. Cynodon dactylon Poaceae + +

60. Cenchrus ciliaris Poaceae

61. Typha angustifolia Typhaceae +

1. Herbs

62. Cannabis sativa Cannabaceae + +

63. Euphorbia Euphorbiaceae + + helioscopia

100

Table 4.2: Classification and characteristic of study sites surveyed as habitat for

birds in the vicinity of BBIA, Islamabad

Sr. Study Sites Classification Characteristics No.

1 Mall Road Commercial habitat hotels, mess, public park, old pine trees

2 Saddar Commercial habitat shops, plazas, restaurants, vacant lots garbage

3 Ayub Park Naturally preserved vegetation, lake, picnic areas, habitat eating areas

4 Kachehri Buildings with old tall pine trees and other plantation Chowk trees

5 Soan Bridge Habitat near water bridge, river bank, trash transfer body and landfill site facility, buffalo keeping, plant nurseries

6 KRL road Habitat near sports sports ground, garbage, ground eucalyptus tree

7 Shaheen Town Landfill site trash transfer site, nala, near (30 end)

8 Bahria town Modern housing vegetation, covered trash transfer phase 8 society facility

101

Table 4.3: Scoring for recognizing bird attractants at each study site in the vicinity of BBIA, Islamabad

Study Sites

Item 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Agriculture, especially grains

Aquaculture facility 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0

Livestock feed lots 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0

Grain storage 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Commercial, recreational land use

Restaurants (especially 3 3 2 2 2 0 3 1 outdoor eating areas)

Picnic areas, parks 3 0 3 0 0 0 0 1

Golf course,sports 0 0 3 0 0 3 0 1 ground

Building used for 3 3 2 3 3 2 2 1 nesting,perching

Waste management

Garbage dumps 2 2 1 3 3 2 3 0

Garbage transfer 0 0 0 0 3 0 3 0 stations

Water sources

Retention ponds, pools 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 1

Streams, ditches 0 0 2 2 3 0 3 1

Continued

102

Table 4.3 Page 2

Study Sites

Item 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Reservoirs, lakes, 0 0 2 0 3 0 0 1 natural ponds

Water supply ponds 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Nesting, loafing, roosting, feeding areas

Natural preserves 0 0 3 0 2 0 0 1

Nesting sites 3 2 3 3 3 2 2 1

Roosting sites 3 2 3 3 3 2 2 1

Marshes, swamps, mud 0 0 2 0 2 0 2 0 flats

Note: 0= not present; 1= present but no bird problem noted or anticipated; 2= site attracts some hazardous birds creating possible or potential problem, site should be monitored; 3= site has significant bird number that may become hazardous for aircraft operation.

103

4.4.12 Water Sources

Water resources present at these sites (Table 4.3) attracted some birds e.g. kites, egrets, myna and plovers due to the availability of rich feeding resource including fish, amphibians, refuse and insect near water bodies. Assemblage of birds near water bodies could be hazardous for aircraft operations.

4.4.13 Nesting, Roosting, Loafing and Feeding Areas

Nesting, roosting, loafing and feeding sites were present at all selected sites. It was evident that naturally preserved recreational area in site 3 due to presence of old trees juxtaposed with water resource offered plenty of bird attracting locations. Natural areas, water body and presence of housing society with proper garbage disposal system were the distinctive features of sites 8; however, bird score was lowest at this site as compared to other sites. The reason might be the scarcity of feeding and nesting resources at this site. Commercial areas and open garbage dumps located at sites 2, 4 and 7 also offered ample feeding nesting and roosting opportunities to the urban area birds like kite, crow, myna and house sparrow. These sites showed maximum bird score and could become hazardous for aircraft operation (Table 4.4).

Ranking of habitat of each study site on the basis of Habitat index (HI) is summarized in Table 4.5. Site 3 (Ayub Park), representing a naturally preserved habitat is at the top in terms of having supportive habitat for bird species. This naturally preserved recreational area, showed not only the highest number of bird species (Table 4 and Table 4.4) but also provided nesting, roosting and feeding

104

habitat for these birds (Table 4.3). Second most supportive habitat for bird species was commercial area of Site 1 (Mall road) having hotels, restaurants, wedding halls and buildings and structures providing nesting, roosting and feeding areas. Then comes site 5 (Soan bridge). Trash transfer station located at site 5 also attracted bird species like kite, egrets, myna, sparrow and crow, providing abundant feeding sources to these birds that may become threatening for flight operations.

Commercial habitat of site 2 with markets, shops, plazas open and garbage dumps and habitat of site 4 with old buildings and tall trees are at the same level in ranking table Old pine trees present at site 4 are habitat for kite (Milvus migrans) which is the main hazardous bird species of this area. Landfill site located at site 5, across the boundary of 30 end of runway at the distance of 500 m was also critical for its attractiveness for problem bird species. Though ranking score of site 6 is 1.8 however, it is very close to the airport boundary and attracted some hazardous birds creating potential problem and should be monitored for bird activity. Site 8 scored least for the attractiveness for birds no severe problem has been anticipated at this site However; this trend could change over the years with rise in human population and development of more houses and commercial areas. Aeroplanes crossing sites with bird score 2-3 (Table 4.4); are likely to be at risk, because of presence of some hazardous bird species at these sites. These sites should be monitored regularly for bird activity. Composite Habitat Index (HCI) of each site

(Table 4.6) also indicates potentially hazardous sites for aircraft operation.

105

Table 4.4: Bird Score for each study site

Sr. No. Study Sites Bird Score

1 Mall Road 3

2 Saddar 3

3 Ayub Park 3

4 Kachehri Chowk 3

5 Soan bridge 2

6 KRL Road 2

7 Runway 30 end 3

8 Bahria Town Phase 8 1

0= not present; 1= present but no bird problem noted or anticipated; 2= site attracts some hazardous birds creating possible or potential problem, site should be monitored; 3= site has significant bird number that may become hazardous for aircraft operation (Annex1)

106

Table 4.5: Habitat Index (HI) of each site for habitat analysis

Study sites 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Agriculture, especially grains Aquaculture facility 0 0 0.33 0 0 0 0 0 Livestock feed lots 0 0 0 0 0.2 0 0 0 Grain storage 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Commercial, recreational land use

Restaurants (especially outdoor eating areas) 1 1 0.67 0.5 0.4 0 0.43 0.125 Picnic areas, parks 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0.125

Golf course,sports ground 0 0 1 0 0 0.5 0 0.125 Building used for nesting‟s, perching 1 1 0.67 0.75 0.6 0.33 0.29 0.125 Waste management Garbage dumps 0.67 0.67 0.33 0.75 0.6 0.33 0.43 0 Continued

107

Table.4.5 Page 2 Study Sites

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Garbage transfer stations 0 0 0 0 0.6 0 0.43 0 Water sources

Retention ponds, pools 0.33 0 0.607 0 0 0 0 0.125

Streams, ditches, 0 0 0.67 0.5 0.6 0 0.43 0.125

Reservoirs, lakes, natural ponds 0 0 0.67 0 0.6 0 0 0.125

Water supply ponds 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Nesting, loafing, roosting, feeding areas

Natural preserves 0 0 1 0 0.4 0 0 0.125

Nesting sites 1 0.67 1 0.75 0.6 0.33 0.29 0.125

Roosting sites 1 0.67 1 0.75 0.6 0.33 0.29 0.125

Marshes, swamps, mud flates 0 0 0.67 0 0.4 0 0.29 0

Habitat Composite Index (HCI) 6 4 9.67 4 5.6 1.83 2.86 1.25

108

Table 4.6: Habitat Composite Index (HCI) of each study site

Study Sites Habitat Composite Index (HCI)

1 6

2 4

3 9.7

4 4

5 5.6

6 1.8

7 2.9

8 1.3

109

Habitat Composite Index HabitatComposite 2

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Study sites

Fig 4: Habitat Composite Index (HCI) of all study sites

110

Table 4.7: Ranking of different habitats on the basis of HCI score

HCI Score Study sites Habitat Characteristic 9.7 3 (Ayub Park) Naturally preserved vegetation, lake, Habitat picnic areas, eating areas

6 1 (Mall road, PC) Commercial hotels, mess, public Habitat park ,old pine trees

5.6 5 ( Soan Bridge) Habitat near water bridge, river bank, body and landfill trash transfer facility, site buffalo keeping, plant nurseries

4 2, 4 (Saddar, Commercial shops, plazas, Kachehri Chowk) habitat, Building restaurants, vacant with old trees lots garbage, old plantation

2.9 7 (Shaheen Landfill Site trash transfer site, Town) nala

1.8 6 (KRL Road) Habitat near sports sports ground, ground garbage, eucalyptus tree

1.3 8 ( Bahria Town) Modern Housing vegetation, covered society trash transfer facility

111

4.5 DISCUSSION

Birds‟ prevalence near airports is a serious safety concern for aircraft

(Burger, 1983). Benazir Bhutto International Airport, Islamabad is situated in highly populated urban area of Rawalpindi city, with many bird attracting sites in its vicinity like natural vegetation, open garbage dumps, water bodies and commercial areas.

Although results of habitat analysis in the vicinity of this airfield suggested that no potential threat was observed due to agriculture or aquaculture facility in this area, however, naturally preserved recreational area of Ayub Park, at the distance of

4.5 km from the airport, showed abundance and diversity of birds (Table 4) and plant species (Table 4.1). These areas of high vegetation density attracted hazardous birds, mainly kites, posing potential threat to aircraft operations at BBIA and PAF

Base Nur Khan and therefore should be monitored for bird activity. Control measures should be taken by the authorities for controlling off airfield situation that may become unsafe for aircraft movement.

Presence of hotels, wedding halls, restaurants, recreational areas on Mall road, sports grounds and golf club near Ayub Park, building with old plantation of pine trees at Fatima Jinnah University and near Kachehri Chowk attracted birds and offered ample sites for nesting feeding and roosting. Commercial area of Saddar with many shops, markets vacant lots and improper garbage disposal system attracted bird species mainly kites (Milvus migrans) which were attracted to huge quantity of food available in the numerous garbage dumps. Similar bird problem has been reported by Matthew et al. (1998 ) in aerodromes of India where Milvus migrans were reported to be numerous and hazardous for aircraft operation and were attracted to

112

huge quantity of food available in waste thrown out of slaughter houses and garbage dumps in the vicinity of Indian aerodromes. Studies conducted by

Upadhyaya and Dolbeer, (2001) at Tribhuvan International Airport, Nepal also suggested that birds of prey were major hazard at this airport, which were attracted to solid waste dumping sites, nearby jungle area providing nesting and roosting sites and garbage filling station near river bank in the close vicinity. Water bodies in the surrounding area of BBIA which include ponds, ditches, stream, marshes, lake and reservoirs originating out of Lai, Soan and Korang river also served as bird attracting sites and provide ample food to problem bird species. Special attention should be paid in these areas to monitor bird activity. Open garbage dumps in the vicinity of airport (Table 2.4) and trash transfer station located under Soan bridge and at the landing site near runway 30 end are of serious safety concern. Large garbage dumps (Fig. 2.8) that lie under landing and takeoff sites should be removed on priority basis to control hazardous bird species.

In conclusion, habitat survey conducted at 8 different study sites, for recognizing bird attractants in the vicinity of BBIA, Islamabad suggested that these sites offer variety of habitat (Table 4.7) each having specific bird attracting characteristic i.e. naturally preserved recreational areas, commercial sites, wedding halls, restaurants, old building, modern housing societies water bodies, open garbage dumping sites and trash transfer facilities adjacent to landing sites.

These sites attract bird species which may become hazardous to aircraft operations. All sites with bird score 2-3 (Table 4.4), pose risk to aircraft flying over these places, because of presence of some hazardous birds mainly kites.

113

These sites should be monitored regularly for bird activity. Pakistan being a member of International Civil Aviation Organization has an obligation to adopt measures necessary for discouraging the presence of birds in the vicinity of airport for smooth aircraft operations. Our national legislation (Civil Aviation

Rule, 1994) also prohibits any activity that attracts birds within 8 km around an aerodrome. Outcome of this baseline study could be incorporated into off airfield bird management program for monitoring bird activity and land use practices.

National and international rules and regulations as mentioned in the ICAO and

Civil Aviation Rule 1994 must be implemented by the concerned authorities. All concerned departments like airport bird control unit, CAA, PAF, local municipal administration and law enforcement agencies must work together in harmony to ensure public safety of all those who fly.

Chapter 5

IDENTIFICATION OF HAZARDOUS BIRD SPECIES AND

THEIR HABITAT

5.1 INTRODUCTION

Birds‟ prevalence in the vicinity of an airfield is hazardous for flight operations. Any bird whether small or large, has the potential to cause damage to an aircraft. Apparently it looks difficult to assess which bird species is more hazardous to aircraft, but over time research has developed and recommended methods are there to do this evaluation. International Civil Aviation Organization‟s Doc. 9137, Airport

Services Manual: Part 3, on Wildlife Control and Reduction recommends certain standards and procedures to be followed for bird hazard assessment. For this purpose, bird species present in a target area are identified and their numbers are counted, bird population and their movement in that area are recorded. It is assumed that larger the bird, the greater the damage would be, on the other hand, there are also greater chance of a strike with flock of same species. Carter (2001) suggested that for effective wildlife control at airfields, a species must be identified and prioritized according to the level of hazard posed by it. He highlighted ten major risk factors in order to determine the comparative risk posed by each species or groups of similar species. These factors included overall population, size of an individual animal, average group size, amount of time spent in air, activity time, location , number of reported strikes involving that species, ability of species to avoid collision and ability to control this species.

114

115

While analyzing The National Wildlife Strike Database for Civil Aviation in The US, Dolbeer (2006) reported that for strikes below 152 m, passerines, gulls and terns, pigeon and doves and raptors were the identified groups of birds most frequently struck.

Dolbeer and Eschenfelder, (2002) proposed that birds flying at high altitude are also a major threat to aircraft. Bird species having large (> 1 kg) body masses and migrating in flocks, make them particularly hazardous to aircraft travelling at higher speed. Identification of bird species involved in bird strike is an integral part of aerodrome bird hazard management. Exact knowledge about species involved in the strikes gives clues about size, behavior, breeding, and feeding patterns of the problem bird species and hence, preventive measures could be taken accordingly.

Bird species identification is one of the major issues for CAA and PAF Pakistan.

ICAO Airport Services Manual (Doc. 9137), Part 3- Wildlife Control and Reduction, also stresses upon the need of off airfield monitoring of bird species. According to this manual; birds presence in the surrounding of airports may also pose threat to aircraft, therefore it is necessary to identify bird species, their behavior, flight lines, seasonal patterns and time of day. In addition to it any significant bird or wildlife attractant, falling within defined radius around an aerodrome, should also be assessed for its attractiveness to birds or wildlife. Hence, present study was designed to identify hazardous bird species and their habitat around BBIA, Islamabad.

5.2 REVIEW OF LITERATURE

Since all bird species are not hazardous to aviation, therefore, it is

116

important to identify the species of conflict and the factors responsible to attract these birds to or near the airports/airfields. In USA, Dolbeer et al. (2000) identified

21 hazardous bird species and among them the vultures and geese were ranked at number one and two, respectively. The third lowest ranked group included small birds that form large flocks such as; blackbirds, starlings, sparrows and swallows causing damage to aircraft. Washburn (2007) evaluated trash transfer facilities in 7 states of USA and found that European starlings, gulls, rock pigeons and crows were the species causing hazards to aircraft safety in these states.

Belant (1997) has reported increase in population of many species of gulls in

North America and Europe. Their abundance in urban areas has resulted in many conflicts with people including threat to aviation. Gulls accounted for 84 percent of bird strikes averaging 260 strikes per year at John F. Kennedy

International airport; New York, USA (Dolbeer, 1998). He has addressed the problem of several gull species becoming hazardous in many American airports.

Many factors like protection from human disturbance, reduction in environmental contaminants, availability of food and gulls‟ ability to adapt to anthropogenic environment has resulted in rise of their population. Gulls‟ abundance in urban areas not only had many clashes with humans but also they become hazardous to aircraft safety.

Witmer and Fantinato, (2003) have reported that raptors are attracted to airports because of rodents. Reduction of rodent population at an airport may decrease raptor population in an area and, therefore, reduce the risk that raptors

117

pose to aircraft.

Dolbeer et al. (1996) reported albatrosses (Diomedea immutabilis) as potential hazardous species at Midway Naval Air Facility. The U.S Navy in 1993 reported 57 strikes during 459 aircraft movement due to birds. Species composition and diurnal pattern of bird flight over runway 6/24 were observed.

They recorded a mean of 363 birds crossing the runway per minute during day light hours. At night only 5-7 birds per minute were flying over the runway, a 98.5 percent difference over mean numbers during day light. It was recommended that non emergency movements should be restricted to night from November to mid

July as day time air movement would raise serious safety issues.

Dolbeer (1998) has stressed on understanding the population status and dynamics for damage management. According to him models are essential to analyse how population will respond to proposed management action. Four population models (PM) were used for predicting population response. PM1 and

PM2 explored the relative efficacy of reproductive and lethal control for vertebrate species over 10 year interval. PM3 simulates population response to actual management action through 10 year interval. PM4 simulates population changes for a species at weekly interval over an annual cycle, exploring the immediate impact of population management action. The results indicated that lethal control was more efficient for most vertebrate pest species, than reproductive control in reducing population level. PM3 for the removal of 47000 laughing gulls from the Long

Island New Jersey population accurately predicted the 33 percent decline of

118

population over five years. PM4 of the annual cycle of the common grackle population in USA explained why removing 4.2 million birds in winter had no impact on breeding season.

Witmer and Fantinato, (2003) have reported that in USA, raptors in particular, are hazardous to aircraft safety due to their size, hunting behavior, and hovering or soaring habits. Similar studies have also been conducted in South Asia.

Upadhyaya and Dolbeer, (2001) reported that raptors such as kites, eagles, vultures and falcons were the main hazardous species at Tribhuvan International Airport,

Kathmandu, Nepal. Matthew et al. (1998) working on five different airports in

India found Pariah kites (Milvus migrans govinda) to be very abundant and threatening species. According to Civil Aviation Authority Pakistan

(www.caapakistan.com.pk.) kites are also becoming problem at many airports in

Pakistan

5.3 MATERIALS AND METHODS

The study was conducted from Jan. 2011 to Dec. 2012. Time-area count survey or fixed point count method (Servoss et al., 2000) was used to collect data for estimation of bird species densities and seasonal effects on target bird species, from eight different study sites, in the vicinity of BBIA. The significance of selecting point count method over other counting methods is that the mean number of detections obtained by using fixed radius point count could also be used to test bird abundance and differences in community composition among sites (Hutto, et al.,

1986). Bird densities calculated in variable radii of point count are not comparable

119

even if they could be converted to common number per unit area. (Hutto, et al.,

1986). The 50 m radius selected was large enough to ensure counting of species of interest. Similar fixed point count method with 40 m radius has been used previously by (Servoss et al., 2000) in habitat analysis around Phoenix Sky Harbor

International Airport, US.

5.3.1 The Point Count Method

5.3.1.1 Data collection

Data on bird species and number were collected from eight different study sites representing eight different habitats i.e. commercial habitats, habitat with buildings having tall trees, naturally preserved recreational areas, habitat near water bodies, habitat near sports ground, garbage dumping sites and habitat covering modern housing societies. At each vantage point data were recorded as follows:

1. The number of individuals of each bird species falling within 50 m radius.

2. Birds that were observed outside the 50 m radius boundary but afterward

moved to within 50 m radius were counted as present within fixed-radius

3. Bird species observed, while travelling between points were also identified

and recorded. Though, this count between the points was merely to the mark

presence of bird species in that particular habitat, but was not part of the count

data used in this analysis.

These bird species were recorded as present (+). List of occurrence (+) of bird

120

species is given in the previous chapter on Habitat Survey.

Birds‟ surveys were carried out biweekly during the one year study period.

At each visit each habitat/site was visited for 15-20 min and birds were counted for

3-5 minutes in a fixed radius. The start time of each count was altered between dawn and dusk. The census began an hour or so after sunrise and finished before 10:30 am. The noon data were recorded between 1200-1500 hours. The dusk observations were started an hour before sunset till half an hour after sunset.

Binoculars were used only to confirm observations and to identify questionable species (Servoss et al., 2000). The survey route was reversed at alternative observation. Name of site, date, time, bird species, numbers observed, activity

(categorized according to flying, loafing nesting, feeding, breeding etc) and habitat type were also recorded (Annexure 2).

5.3.1.2 Species of concern

Preliminary interviews, discussions with Civil Aviation Authority and

Pakistan Air Force personnel revealed that birds posing threats to aviation at BBIA,

Islamabad, Pakistan were kites, pigeons, common myna, house sparrows, house crows, flocks of other unidentified small birds. So being potential hazards these birds were of special concern. For estimation of target bird species‟ density I focused mainly on Kite (Milvus migrans), as kites were found to be involved in 59 percent of all strike with known bird species, and my objective was not to estimate density of every species but to establish an index of abundance of the most hazardous species (Servoss et al., 2000).

121

5.3.2 Data Evaluation

5.3.2.1 Species Density

Species density was used to estimate population of birds belonging to each species.

( )

5.3.2.2 Relative Abundance

Relative abundance of each bird species was calculated by following

K-Dominance Species Abundance Model. In addition to it the most abundant species was calculated by:

5.3.2.3 The Simpson Biodiversity Index

Species diversity of each habitat was calculated by using Simpson

Biodiversity Index (Mandaville, 2002). Simpson's Diversity Index is a measure of diversity which takes into accounts both richness and evenness. Species richness is the number of different species present. However, diversity depends not only on richness, but also on evenness. Evenness compares the similarity of the population size of each of the species present. As species richness and evenness increase, so diversity increases.

Simpson index values (D) are between 0-1 while calculating final result it was divided by 1 to correct the reciprocal proportion.

( ) ( )

122

Where:

D is Simpson Diversity Index ni is number of individuals belonging to i species

N is total number of individuals

5.3.2.4 Margalef Diversity Index

It shows a variation depending upon the number of species. Thus, it‟s used for comparison of sites (Kocataş 1992).

( ) Where: d is Margalef Diversity Index S is total number of species N is Total number of individuals

5.3.2.5 Clustering

It was possible after estimation of species estimation to cluster different habitat by using Bray-Curtis Cluster Analysis. Statistical tests were applied using software Biodiversity Pro Version 2.

5.3.3 Seasonal Effects on kite (Milvus migrans)

Seasonal effects on target bird species, (Milvus migrans), were estimated to observe difference in number of birds or bird abundance in any particular season.

For seasonal analysis, data were segregated into five seasons i.e. winter (November to

February), spring (March to April), summer (May-June), monsoon (July-August) and fall (September-October). ANOVA was applied to compare difference in mean

123

numbers of birds present in all five seasons. Difference within season was calculated by

LSD test.

5.4 RESULTS

5.4.1 Estimation of Bird Species Density

Combined data of species density is given in Table 5.1. Majority of target bird species were prevalent in all the habitats, however, some species preferred certain habitats over the others. Bird population (mean number per 50 m radius) at 8 study sites around BBIA, Islamabad (2011-212) is shown in Table 5.2.

5.4.2 Percentage Distribution of Species

Percentage distribution of bird species at 8 different study sites, recorded during habitat survey (2011-2012) in the vicinity of BBIA, Islamabad, is shown in Figs 5.1-5.8. Results of percentage distribution, of site 1, which represented commercial habitat with dominant feature including hotels, mess, public parks and commercial area, showed that kite population was dominant (66 percent) in this area with distribution of other species ranging between 2-7 percent (Fig 5.1).

Results of site 2, which again represented commercial habitat, but dominant features at this site were markets, shops, plazas, vacant lot and open garbage dumps, showed that kite population was dominant (62 percent) in this area with distribution of other species ranging between 3-21 percent. More mynas were present at this site as compared to site 1.

124

In contrast to site 1 and 2, crow (59 percent) dominated site 3, which represented a naturally preserved recreational area. Second highest density of kite (26 percent) recorded at this site (Fig 5.3). Kite density at site 4, Kachehri Chowk, was highest (81percent). House martin dominated site 5 (76 percent) other birds recorded at this site included kite, pigeon, common myna, house sparrow, egret bulbul and drongo. Crow dominated at site 7 (93 percent) and at site 8(81 percent). Percentage distribution of different birds recorded at 8 different study sites is shown in Figs 5.1-

5.8.

125

Drongo Bulbul Sparrow 5% 4% 5% Dove 2% Myna 7% Pigeon 5%

Crow Kite 6% 66%

Fig 5.1: Percentage distribution of species density at Site 1 (Commercial habitat) at

Mall Road, Rawalpindi.

Drongo House Martin Sparrow 2% 5% 6% Dove 1%

Myna 21%

Kite Crow 62% 3%

Fig. 5.2: Percentage distribution of species density at Site 2 (Commercial habitat),

Saddar, Rawalpindi.

126

Sparrow Drongo Egret Bulbul 1% 1% 3% 1% Dove Myna 3% 4% Pigeon 2% Kite 26%

Crow 59%

Fig 5.3: Percentage distribution of species density at Site 3 (Ayub Park, recreational

area), Rawalpindi.

Sparrow Bulbul Dove 2% 3% Myna 3% 3% Pigeon 3%

Crow 5%

Kite 81%

Fig 5.4: Percentage distribution of species density at Site 4 (Kachehri Chowk),

Rawalpindi

127

Kite Crow 3% Pigeon 11% 1% Dove Myna 1% 3% Sparrow 1% Drongo 0% Egret 3% Bulbul 1%

76% house martin

Fig 5.5: Percentage distribution of species density at Site 5 (Soan Bridge, water

body and landfill site) Rawalpindi

Sparrow Dove Myna 9% 2% 1% Pigeon 0% Kite 31%

Crow 57%

Fig 5.6: Percentage distribution of species density at Site 6 (KRL road), Rawalpindi

128

Egret Drongo Kite 0% 1% Myna 2% 4%

Crow 93%

Fig 5.7: Percentage distribution of species density at Site 7 (Runway 30 end),

Rawalpindi

Dove Sparrow Bulbul 2% 3% 3% Kite 3% Myna 8%

Crow 81%

Fig 5.8: Percentage distribution of species density at Site 8 (Bahria Town) (modern

housing in natural area), Rawalpindi.

129

Table 5.1: Cumulative bird species density recorded during habitat survey (2011-2012) at 8 selected study sites in Rawalpindi

Bird Species (Density/m²)

House Mean Kite Crow Pigeon Myna Dove Sparrow Egret Bulbul Study Sites Drongo Martin Bird (Milvus (Corvus (Columbia (Acridotheres (Streptopelia (Passer (Egretta (Pycnonotus (Dicrurus (Delichon density migrans) splendens) livia) tristis) decaocto) domesticus) alba) cafer) macrocercus) urbicum) of Sites

1-Mall road 0.003484 0.000321 0.000255 0.000382 0.0000849 0.000276 0.000242 0 0.000200 0 0.000524 2-Saddar 0.004279 0.000232 0 0.001428 0.0000849 0.000403 0.000106 0 0 0.000361 0.00069 3-Ayub Park 0.003048 0.006746 0.000202 0.000478 0.0002972 0.000106 0.00017 0.000127 0.000325 0 0.00115 4-Kachehri 0.004869 0.000288 0.000191 0.000187 0.0001698 0.000149 0 0 0.000169 0 0.000602 Chowk 5-Soan 0.000605 0.002208 0.000223 0.000522 0.0002663 0.000191 0 0.000722 0.000254 0.016157 0.002115 bridge 6-KRL Cricket 0.004482 0.008293 0 0.000191 0.0005095 0.00138 0 0 0 0 0.001486 Stadium road 7-Runway 30 0.000475 0.029844 0.000191 0.000937 0 0.000106 0.000212 0.000127 0 0 0.003189 end 8-Bahria 0.000286 0.007111 0 0.000703 0.000169 0.000255 0 0 0.000254 0 0.000878 Town Phase 8 Mean Density 0.002691 0.0068803 0.0001327 0.0006036 0.000197 0.0003583 9.13E-05 0.0001221 0.000150 0.002064 0.001329

130

Table 5.2: Bird population (mean number per 50 m radius) at 8 study sites around BBIA, Islamabad (2011-212)

Study sites KRL Bahria Kachehri Soan Cricket Runway Species Mall road Saddar Ayub Park Town Chowk bridge Stadium 30 end Phase 8 road

Kite (Milvus migrans) 27.35 33.59 23.92 38.22 4.75 35.18 3.80 2.25

Crow (Corvus splendens) 2.51 1.82 52.95 2.25 17.33 65.10 227.21 55.81

Pigeon (Columbia livia) 2 0 1.58 1.5 1.75 0 0 0

Common myna (Acridotheres tristis) 3 11.21 3.75 1.46 4.1 1.5 10.2 5.52

Dove (Streptopelia decaocto) 0.66 0.66 2.33 1.33 2.09 2.6 1 1.33

Sparrow (Passer domesticus) 2.16 3.166 0.83 1.16 1.5 10.83 0.83 2

Drongo (Dicrurus macrocercus) 1.9 0.83 1.33 0 0 0 1.66 0

Egret (Egretta alba) 0 0 1 0 5.66 0 1 0

Bulbul (Pycnonotus cafer) 1.57 0 2.55 1.33 2 0 0 2

House Martin (Delichon urbicum) 0 2.83 0 0 126.83 0 0 0

131

5.4.3 K-Dominance Species Abundance Model

Species abundance was calculated by using K-Dominance Species

Abundance Model. The K-dominance plot shows the cumulative percentage (the percentage of the k-th most dominant plus all more dominant species) in relation to species (k) rank or log species (k) rank. The model depicted that highest abundance of kite (81percent) was observed in habitat having old buildings with tall plantation of pine trees (study site 4) followed by commercial habitat of site 1

(66 percent) and then in commercial area of site 2 (62 percent). Crow dominated at landfill site of study site 7 (92 percent) followed by site 8, 3, 5 and 9 (Table 5.3).

5.4.4 Simpson’s Biodiversity Index

K-Dominance abundance model does not tell us much about the species diversity. As Simpson‟s biodiversity index calculates species diversity taking into consideration both the richness and evenness, results of this model indicated (Table

5.4) that naturally preserved area of site 3 had the maximum biodiversity index

(2.428) followed by site 6 with the diversity index of 2.398. Commercial habitats of site 2 and site 1 had diversity values of 2.352 and 2.243, respectively. These indices could help focusing on areas rich in biodiversity and help in formulating bird management plans accordingly.

5.4.5 Margalef Diversity Index

Another diversity index i.e. Margalef Diversity index showed highest value of index of site 1 (5.574) followed by site 4 (5.374) and then at site 2 (5.192). The variation in the Margalef Diversity index is due to the fact that it takes into account the

132

number of species and not the number of individuals (Table 5.5).

5.4.6 Bray-Curtis Cluster Analysis

Habitat Composite index as calculated in habitat analysis in previous study (Chapter 3) classified the habitats on the basis of presence of bird attractants at a particular site. In this section I did Cluster Analysis of habitat on the basis of species. Cluster formation of similarity matrix is given in (Table 5.6) indicating that 80% similarity existed between site 1 (Commercial habitat with hotels, mess and pine trees) and site 4 (buildings with old pine trees). Both these sites had dominance of kite. Seventy nine percent similarities were found between naturally preserved recreational area of sites 3 and 6 which represented sports ground area.

These sites had abundance of crow. Sites 3 and 8 were similar (79 percent) on the basis of presence of crows at these sites. Seventy six percent similarities existed again between commercial habitats of sites 1 and 2. Dominant birds at these two sites were kites.

133

Table 5.3: K-Dominance Species Abundance Model

Mall road Saddar Ayub Park Kachehri chowk Soan bridge KRL Cricket Runway 30 end Bahria Town (Commercial Commercial Naturally Building with Water body Stadium road Landfill site Phase 8 hotel,mess) habitat preserved old pine trees Sports ground Modern Recreational housing society area House Kite 66.429 Kite 62.07 Crow 58.661 Kite 80.841 76.399 Crow 56.5 Crow 92.468 Crow 80.988 martin Myna 73.716 Myna 82.781 Kite 85.169 Crow 85.619 Crow 86.838 Kite 87.039 Myna 96.619 Myna 88.997

Crow 79.83 Sparrow 88.631 Myna 89.323 Pigeon 88.791 Egret 90.248 Sparrow 96.442 Kite 98.169 Kite 92.262 House Sparrow 85.092 93.866 Bulbul 92.153 Myna 91.893 Kite 93.109 Dove 98.698 Drongo 98.847 Sparrow 95.164 martin Pigeon 89.949 Crow 97.229 Dove 94.738 Dove 94.713 Myna 95.579 Myna 100 Dove 99.254 Bulbul 98.065

Drongo 94.564 Drongo 98.768 Pigeon 96.492 Bulbul 97.533 Dove 96.838 Pigeon 100 Egret 99.661 Dove 100

Bulbul 98.381 Dove 100 Drongo 97.969 Sparrow 100 Bulbul 98.042 Drongo 100 Sparrow 100 Pigeon 100

Dove 100 Pigeon 100 Egret 99.077 Drongo 100 Pigeon 99.096 Egret 100 Pigeon 100 Drongo 100

Egret 100 Egret 100 Sparrow 100 Egret 100 Sparrow 100 Bulbul 100 Bulbul 100 Egret 100

Note: Kite (Milvus migrans), Crow (Corvus splendens), Pigeon (Columbia livia), Myna (Acridotheres tristis), Dove (Streptopelia decaocto), Sparrow (Passer domesticus), Drongo (Dicrurus macrocercus), Egret (Egretta alba), Bulbul (Pycnonotus cafer), House Martin (Delichon urbicum)

134

Table 5.4: The Simpson Biodiversity Index of all eight study sites

Mall road Saddar Ayub Park Kachehri Soan bridge KRL Cricket Runway 30 Bahria Town (Commercial chowk Stadium end( Landfill Phase 8 (Commercial (Naturally (Water body) Index hotel, mess) road (Sports site) (Modern habitat) preserved (Building ground) housing recreational with old pine society) area) trees)

Simpsons Diversity (D) 0.446 0.425 0.412 0.653 0.595 0.417 0.857 0.661

Simpsons Diversity (1/D) 2.243 2.352 2.428 1.532 1.68 2.398 1.168 1.514

135

Table 5.5: Margalef Diversity Index of all eight study sites

Study sites

Mall road Saddar Ayub Park Kachehri Soan bridge KRL Runway Bahria Town (Commercial (Commercial (Naturally chowk (Water body, Cricket 30 end Phase 8 habitat/hotels) habitat) preserved (Building landfill site) Stadium (Landfill (Modern Recreational with old road site) housing area) trees) (Sports society) Index ground)

Margalef M Base 10. 5.574 5.192 4.602 5.374 4.054 4.366 3.765 4.896

136

Fig 5.9: Similarity among different habitats on the basis of various bird species (Bray-Curtis Cluster Analysis)

137

Table 5.6: Cluster formation for similarity matrix

Step Clusters Distance Similarity Joined 1 Joined 2

1 7 19.18387 80.81613 1 4

2 6 20.62903 79.37097 3 6

3 5 20.69836 79.30164 3 8

4 4 23.64202 76.35798 1 2

5 3 46.08514 53.91486 1 3

6 2 58.41497 41.58503 1 7

7 1 73.98489 26.01511 1 5

138

5.4.7 Species Distribution

5.4.7.1 House Crow (Corvus splendens)

House crow (Corvus splendens), belonging to family Corviadea, were distributed throughout in all study sites along the survey route (Table 5.1).

However highest densities of crow were recorded at study site 7 (30 end of runway, Fig 5.7), site 8 (Bahria Town, Fig. 5.8) and site 3 (Ayub Park, Fig 5.3) respectively. Crows were observed exploiting all feeding opportunities available in habitats like open garbage dumps located outside Sarwar park at Site 1, garbage dump at Saddar, on grassy fields of sports grounds of KRL cricket stadium and in nearby garbage dumps, water bodies of Soan, in public parks, in commercial places and also in naturally preserved areas of Ayub Park. It was observed feeding on household refuse, kitchen waste, insects, earthworms, cockroaches (personal observation) grasshoppers, fruits, grains, carrion, and road kills. Highest numbers of crow were observed at site 7 near runway 30 end. Roost of crow averaging

1500-2000 bird were recorded inside the airport boundary along the northeast of runway 30 in a dense strip of mixed strands of Paper Mulberry (Broussonetia papyrifera), Eucalyptus (Eucalyptus camaldulensis) and Indian rose wood

(Dalbergia sisso). Similarly, relatively higher crow density was recorded at site 8

(Bahria Town), site 3 (Ayub Park) and near KRL cricket stadium. Crows were found nesting in Eucalyptus camaldulensis present at site 6 and 7, Broussonetia papyrifera,

Albizzia lebbek, Cupressus sempervirnes, Dalbergia sisso, Morus alba, Populous euphratica and Salmalia malbarica at Ayub Park and roosting dominantly in

Acacia modesta at Bahria Town site.

139

5.4.7.2 Kite (Milvus migrans)

Kite (Milvus migrans), belonging to family Accipitridae, were also distributed throughout in all study sites (Table 5.1). These birds of prey were observed soaring high and occupying most of the airspace in the vicinity of the airport. Kites were observed feeding on carrion, frogs, lizards, insects, chicken, dead animals `killed in road accidents, fish from water bodies of Lai and Soan, house hold garbage and refuse available at open garbage dumps, moles and rats. Highest numbers of kites were observed at site 4 (Fig 5.4) in Fatimah Jinnah University at

Kachehri Chowk. Roosts of kite averaging 20-30 birds per tree were found associated with pine trees present inside Fatima Jinnah Women University, and

Punjab house in the nearby vicinity. Trees present at this site are very old and tall, kite nests were also recorded on these tall pine trees. Our results revealed that site

1(Fig. 5.1), site 2 (Fig. 5.2), site 3 (Fig. 5.3), site 4 (Fig. 5.4) and site 6 (Fig. 5.6) showed higher densities of kite than at site 5 (Fig 5.5), site 7 (Fig 5.7) and site 8 (Fig

5.8). Kites were found associated mainly with tall trees of Pinus roxburghii,

Dalbergia sisso, Eucalyptus camaldulensis and were seen nesting and roosting on these trees. Structures like telephone towers, tall buildings were also utilized for nesting .as their nesting sites. The kites were also observed sitting high on the billboards and logos mounted at the top of these buildings. Kites were the largest birds soaring high in the study area. Flock of kites, with average number 20-30 birds were often found hovering over Fatima Jinnah University, Saddar, near Golf Club,

Ayub Park and Saddar area. This flocking and soaring behavior of these massive birds is critically dangerous for safe aircraft operation at these sites. Moreover, keeping in mind the breeding seasons of the species, especially when young birds

140

emerge out of their nests in the months of April and May (own observation), effective control methods could be devised. It was observed that pairing in kite began during the months of Oct-Nov. During this period birds were observed producing special call signs. A Pair was found actively involved in chasing each other, both the sexes were found taking part in nest building. It had been observed throughout the study period (three years) that same nest was used in the successive years. At these study sites, Kites preferred nesting on tall plantation especially Pinus roxburgii ranging in estimated height of 10-15 m on, Eucalyptus camaldulensis (10-12 m), Dalbergia Sisso (5-10 m) and on telephone poles approximately (18-20m) in height and tall buildings (15-20 m height). Female kites were present around their nest during egg laying (Dec-Jan) and hatching season.

First chicks were observed emerging from their nests at the end of April to late May and some time the period extended to June. The juvenile were observed fledging during the months of May and June. Thirteen kite nests were observed during the study period. One on telephone towers at site 8, three at site 3 (on

Dalbergia Sisso and Eucalyptus camaldulensis), four at site 1(on Pinus roxburgii and Eucalyptus camaldulensis) and five at site 4 on (Eucalyptus camaldulensis,. and Pinus roxburgii) Average height of these kite nests from the ground level was

15-20 m.

5.4.7.3 Common Myna (Acridotheres tristis)

Common myna (Acridotheres tristis) was also distributed evenly in all study

141

sites along the survey route (Table 5.1). Mynas were observed to nest in tree cavities at Sarwar park and Ayub Park and also cavities made in mud near site 8 (Bahria

Town). Like house crows, they were also found exploiting all feeding opportunities available in habitats i.e. open garbage dumps located at site 1, 2, 4 and 7, on grassy fields of sports grounds site 6, near water bodies of site 5, in public parks site 1, in commercial and also in naturally preserved areas (site 3). It was found feeding on household garbage, kitchen waste, insects, earthworms, cockroaches, grasshoppers and fruits thrown out from vegetable shops, grains, carrion, and road kills.

5.4.7.4 Black Drongo (Dicrurus macrocercus)

Black drongo was observed mainly at site 1, 2, 3 and 7 (Table 5.1). This bird was found perching on branches, overhead cables or power line. The bird mainly fed on insects like grasshoppers, bees, ants, moths, dragonflies and mosquitoes (Fischer,

1923). It was found associated with common myna, egrets and other birds near garbage transfer stations in the vicinity of the airfield and other sites near water bodies of Soan and Lai.

5.4.7.5 Bulbul (Pycnonotus cafer)

Bulbul was observed mainly in Sarwar park (Site 1), gardens, lawns of hotels and in vegetation of natural areas (Ayub Park and Bahria Town) (Table 5.1). It was found around shrubs of rose (Rosa indica), hibiscus (rosa-sinensis), bougainvillea

(Bougainvillea glabra), pomegranate (Punica granatum), guava (Psidium guajava ) and date palm (Phoniex dactylifera) plum (Syzygium cumini), kachnar ( Bauhinia

142

variegata) citrus (Citrus sinensis) and fig (Ficus carica) trees at these sites.

5.4.7.6 Egret (Egretta alba)

Egrets were found near water bodies of site 5 (Fig. 5.5) and 7 (Fig. 5.7).

They were observed feeding along with myna, kites and crows near garbage dumps under Soan bridge, at Shaheen Town near runway 30 end and were observed exploiting food from Soan river. These birds were also observed in Ayub Park.

Population of egret was not observed in commercial areas of site 1, 2 and near site 4.

5.4.7.7 Pigeon (Columba livia) and Dove (Streptopelia decaocto)

The doves and pigeons were observed in all habitats except for site 7 garbage dumping site (Table 5.1). These birds have been well settled in urban areas. Pigeons were observed inhibiting in wide variety of natural and urban environment. They were found in crevices and cracks, under bridges and in buildings. Pigeon keeping is also a very common hobby in many areas of Rawalpindi. Dove were mainly concentrated at Ayub Park, site 3 where they were seen feeding on ground, grass, grains and utilizing, trees, branches and overhead cables as perching sites.

5.4.7.8 House Sparrow (Passer domesticus)

Passer domesticus was widely spread and abundant in all habitats of these study sites, however highest density of this species was recorded in KRL sports ground (Fig. 5.6), where flocks of sparrow were seen feeding on fields of cricket stadium. It is a commensal species found exploiting food from household refuse, garbage dumps, insects, grains and seeds from grasses. It nests usually in

143

cavities or utilize structure such as shades of street lights, holes in window sills, buildings. Both sexes take part in nest formation.

5.4.7.9 House Martin (Delichon urbicum)

A colony of house martin, of about 1500-2500 birds, was found underneath the Soan Bridge (Fig. 5.5). Nests were made of mud in cup like structure. There were swarms of mosquitoes in the area (probably the most abundant feeding resource available for martins).

5.4.8 Seasonal Effects on kite (Milvus migrans)

Seasonal variation in number of kites during (2011-2012) is shown in Fig.

5.10. Two peaks in mean number of birds were observed in the month wise distributed data. First peak was seen in May and June and second between August and September. Seasonality in mean count of kite is shown in (Fig 5.11). Mean count remained 20 during winter (Nov-Feb), and spring (Mar-Apr).It peaked (78) during summer (May-June) and in fall (Sep-Oct) (79) and remained moderate (57) during monsoon (Jul-Aug) season. Results of ANOVA indicated overall significant difference (p < 0.05) in mean kite count among different seasons.

However, Least Square Difference (LSD) revealed significantly higher number of birds (p < 0.05) during fall, summer and monsoon as compared to winter and spring seasons. Furthermore, the kite count was significantly higher (p < 0.05) during fall than those recorded in summer and monsoon seasons. Hourly kite movement pattern in all seasons is shown in Figs. 5.12- 5.17. Six interval moving average has been used in the trend in hourly kite movement pattern around BBIA.

144

120

100

0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

Fig 5.10: Monthly mean number of kites at all study sites in the vicinity of BBIA,

Islamabad

140

120

100

60 Meancount of kites 40

0 Winter Spring Summer Monsoon Fall Seasons

Fig 5.11: Seasonality in mean count of kites (2011-2012) (statistically significant

difference was observed between number of kites in all season) (P< 0.05)

145

Fig 5.12: Hourly mean kite count distribution pattern during study period 2011-2012

100

Mean number ofkites number Mean 30

525 630 630 635 702 710 715 720 725 742 756 921 950

1106 1128 1200 1217 1220 1250 1301 1345 1400 1420 1420 1430 1438 1505 1612 1711 1715 1726 1732 1749 1800 1811 1830 1830 1840 1840 1842 1925 time

146

Fig 5.13: Hourly mean kite count distribution pattern during winter season (Nov-Feb) at study sites around BBIA, Islamabad

(2011-2012)

Actual Average 80

30 Mean number Meannumber Kitesof

Time

147

Fig 5.14: Hourly mean kite count distribution pattern during spring season (Mar- April) at study sites around BBIA, Islamabad

(2011-2012)

Actual Average

100

40 Mean number Meannumber ofKites 30

525 630 703 715 716 720 720 725 730 735 854 950

1000 1134 1215 1239 1355 1400 1420 1420 1420 1435 1435 1500 1530 1630 1711 1714 1720 1726 1727 1739 1747 1805 1815 1830 1830 1831 Time

148

Fig 5.15: Hourly mean kite count distribution pattern during summer season (May-Jun) at study sites around BBIA, Islamabad

(2011-2012)

Actual Average 100

Mean number Meannumber Kitesof 30

Time

149

Fig 5.16: Hourly mean kite count distribution pattern during monsoon season (Jul- Aug) at study sites around BBIA, Islamabad (2011-2012)

Actual Average 80

30 Mean number Meannumber kites of

630 630 630 630 630 630 630 630 630 630 635 640 645 855

1005 1320 1345 1420 1730 1758 1830 1835 1840 1840 1840 1840 1840 1840 1840 1840 1840 1840 1850 1900 1900 Time

150

Fig 5.17: Hourly mean kite count distribution pattern during fall season (Sep-Oct) at study sites around BBIA, Islamabad (2011-2012)

Actual Average

30 Mean number Meannumber kites of 20

0 702 717 723 915 920 920 921 1022 1122 1125 1130 1200 1732 1735 1751 1755 1805 1830 Time

151

5.5 DISCUSSION

Past bird strike data analysis of BBIA, Islamabad suggested that birds of prey, mainly kite, was involved in 59 percent of all known strikes thus including it at the top in list of species of concern. Each group of small and medium sized birds was involved in 14 percent of the strikes and pigeons were reported to be involved in 7 percent of the collisions (as categorized by CAA). Any detailed information on type of species struck was lacking in CAA bird strike data. However, interviews with PAF and CAA personnel suggested that kites, myna, pigeon, dove, sparrow and bulbul were species of concern. This study on identification of hazardous bird species and densities of species of concern, in the habitat around BBIA, provided base line information which could be incorporated into site specific management plan of BBIA Islamabad.

Kite (Milvus migrans), house crow (Corvus splendens), common myna

(Acridotheres tristis), sparrow (Passer domesticus), pigeon (Columbia livia) and dove (Streptopelia decaocto) were the species present at almost all the study sites in addition to these species bulbul (Pycnonotus cafer), drongo (Dicrurus macrocercus), egrets (Egretta alba) and house martin (Delichon urbicum) were also recorded in different densities at these study sites. Although house crow (Corvus splendens) were the most abundant bird species recorded, but I found no record of crow strike in past eight year CAA bird strike data analysis (2005-2012). However, crow has been reported as problem bird species at PAF Base Kamra, Pakistan. Like house sparrow (Passer domesticus) and common myna (Acridotheres tristis) it is also a commensal species, well adapted to human settlements (Roberts, 1992). It is well

152

known for its adaptability and intelligence (Jerdon, 1863). A crow was seen avoiding an approaching training fighter plane, near runway 30 end of Nur Khan Airbase

PAF, by lowering its flight under the approaching aircraft. Population of crow in problem areas could be controlled by habitat modification. A shift in crow flight line was observed after removal of dense vegetation of Paper Mulberry (Broussonetia papyrifera) Eucalyptus (Eucalyptus camaldulensis) and Indian rose wood

(Dalbergia sisso) along the northeast side of the runway 30 in December 2010.

Moreover, it is evident from the results that crow density is greater in naturally preserved and open areas of sites including Ayub Park, Bahria Town, near open area of runway 30 end. Airport environment provide ample feeding resources to many bird species. According to Godin (1994) in airport environment birds are attracted to seeds, berries, grasses, insects, earthworms, small birds and small mammals. Birds like kites, egrets, pigeons, myna, house sparrow, dove and drongo were found attracted to these sources present at and in the vicinity of BBIA and these may become hazardous for aircraft operations. Landfill site under Soan bridge and that adjacent to runway 30 are highly threatening sites in terms of attracting birds such as kite, egret, crow and myna.

Bird behavior, feeding habits, nesting and roosting preferences and knowledge about breeding cycle could provide a clue for devising control measures for these birds. For example management efforts could be intensified during the periods when young birds leave their nests or in spring and monsoon seasons when of plenty of food is available. Tree plantation at and around the airport should be carefully done keeping in mind their attractiveness for birds. It

153

has been observed that the species like kites, crows, myna and egrets were feeding on open garbage dumps scattered all around in the surrounding area of the airport.

Measures should be taken by the district, provincial and federal governments and other relevant agencies responsible to control garbage accumulation in the surroundings of BBIA.

Bird densities could be used to highlight and map the areas which are potentially threatening. For example, colonies of house martin under Soan bridge which emerge as flocks during dawn and dusk may pose a threat. It has been proven that physical barriers like fencing, netting and overhead wires and lines could be used for bird exclusion from critical area (Harris and Davis, 1998). Netting could be used under bridges to prevent formation of colonies of not only house martin but also to avoid nesting of species like sparrow, pigeon and dove at airport environment (Skira and Wapstra, 1990). Fencing and electrified fencing have proven to be an effective method to keep pigeons from roosting on buildings (Koski and Richardson, 1976). Birds were also seen using the billboards, telephone poles, towers and buildings as perching sites. Anti-roosting spike could be used to repel from these sites.

Highest density of kites was recorded in buildings with old pine plantation at

Kachehri Chowk, Punjab House and in commercial areas of Mall road and

Saddar. These sites lie in cantonment area of Rawalpindi and have old plantation of tall trees including Pinus roxburghii, Dalbergia sisso and Eucalyptus camaldulensis. Perennial trees such as spruce, pine and junipers should not be

154

planted in dense strand in the vicinity or at airport environment as they provide nesting and roosting habitat for many flocking bird species (Washburn and Seamans,

2007). In addition to trees, there is plenty of food available for kites at open garbage dumps scattered all around in the vicinity of BBIA. I observed low density of kites in Bahria Town where garbage is controlled by an effective trash transfer system. Similarly, by controlling garbage accumulation in the surrounding area of airport this problem of bird and human conflict could be addressed efficiently.

It is unlikely that the airport authorities will be able to prevent bird strike risk arising from the bird prevalence in the vicinity of the BBIA due to the abundance of attractive sites in its surroundings. However, keeping in mind land use practices, bird densities, bird behavior, feeding preferences, breeding cycles, nesting and knowledge about roosting perching sites obtained by the results of this study could help devising effective bird control measures to mitigate bird strike risk.

Chapter 6

EVALUATION OF EXISTING MANAGEMENT TECHNIQUES

AT BENAZIR BHUTTO INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT,

ISLAMABAD

6.1 INTRODUCTION

Birds and aircraft collisions are a serious threat to aircraft operations. Hence, there is a need for use of effective bird control techniques to meet this challenge.

Generally, there are three to four globally accepted ways that are recommended for the management of bird problems i.e. habitat manipulation, scaring, repelling and removal methods. The airport authorities are responsible for managing bird strike problem at their airports so it is necessary that they must use appropriate, suitable and reliable methods. Collision of birds with aircraft is also a severe safety concern at

BBIA, Islamabad, Pakistan. Analysis of past eight year bird strike data of BBIA

Islamabad (Chapter 3) showed that in total 213 bird strikes were recorded during the period 2005-2012. Airport authorities of BBIA employ different bird control methods such as habitat management, use of scare crow, de-nesting, poisoning and scaring at their airfield. Shooting is also an activity that is being used to deter this menace from the runways of BBIA. Studies have shown (Anderson, 1986; Nomsen, 1989) that shooting has been used to scare or kill birds at fisheries and agriculture fields as a pest management practice and it is also used at airports for keeping birds away from the airfields (De Fusco and Nagy, 1983). Though, many birds are killed as a result of shooting, however, the main aim is to scare them. Biological basis of this frightening technique as explained by experts (Harris and Davis, 1998) is that when shotguns and rifles are fired, they produce a loud sound followed by a buzzing noise that may

155

156

scatter birds which may or may not kill some birds.

The objective of this study was to analyse and evaluate past three year bird shooting data (2011-2013) of BBIA, Islamabad, to explore annual and seasonal trends in shooting practice at the airfield and to estimate economic cost of shooting at BBIA. Although the data are too little for any in-depth analysis, however, some basic information regarding number of cartridges fired, number of birds or animals

(stray dogs) shot and yearly trend in shooting were explored. The information generated by this study would highlight the seasonal variation in shooting (if any) so that other management efforts could be practiced during these periods. This analysis may prove useful to people in the aviation industry trying to reduce number of birds at their airfields.

6.2 REVIEW OF LITERATURE

6.2.1 Bird Management Techniques at Airports

Many management techniques are available to reduce birds present at or around the airports (Belant and Martin, 2011; DeVault et al., 2013). Several of these techniques have been evaluated for their efficacy. Methods of bird control may involve reducing overall bird population, artificially killing birds, reducing the number of bird in an area by manipulating the habitats and dispersing birds from runways by variety of scaring devices. The carrying capacity can be lowered by making the airport and its vicinity relatively unattractive to birds.

Burger (1983) suggested that bird strikes can be reduced near airports by

157

employing different management techniques i.e. by reducing the number, by making the bird get out of the way of airplanes, by having planes avoid birds, by adding physical protection to planes and by switching new type of planes which are safer with respect to bird strike. These techniques are generally more effective when used in an integrated fashion (Conover, 2002).

6.2.2 Removal Method (Shooting)

Dolbeer et al. (1993) have reported that shooting gull program at John F.

Kennedy International Airport reduced the indices of strikes between all species of gulls and aircraft, by 70 percent in 1991 and 89 percent in 1992. However, Dolbeer and Bucknall (1994), in another study at the same airport, found that in 3,401 person-hour of shooting 35,692 gulls were killed. In spite of removal of 32,000 gulls in 1991-1993, the nesting colony declined by only about 20 percent. The results suggest that although shooting is an effective method of controlling the incidences of bird strike, the program has not significantly reduced the nearby nesting colonies.

Dolbeer (1998) also evaluated shooting in combination with falconry to reduce bird strikes with aircraft at John. F. Kennedy Airport. Laughing gulls accounted for 84 percent of bird strikes from 1988 to 1990, averaging 260 strikes per year. In 6,369 person-hour of shooting, 52,235 gulls were killed. This program was designed to deal with a specific problem of gulls from a large, nearby nesting colony flying over the airport for feeding site beyond the airport. It was recommended that in addition to shooting program some other techniques like integrated bird management program, habitat management and use of various bird

158

threatening methods should be practiced. Falconry may have a role in this bird control program; but generally it is not recommended because of unpredictable actions of falcons. However, more research is needed to assess the role of falconry in reducing the hazard.

6.3 MATERIALS AND METHODS

6.3.1 Evaluation of Shooting Data (2011-2013) of BBIA

Shooting data record is maintained by the PAF personnel at BBIA,

Islamabad. In total 11-13 bird shooters (2 from CAA and 11 from PAF), on average five shooters per shift, were positioned along both sides of the runway.

They were responsible for keeping away any bird coming in the way of an ascending or landing aircraft and maintaining clear runways. Shooters stood or sat in the open area near shooting posts and wore orange jackets. The shooting data of

BBIA, Islamabad (2011-2013) was supplied by Pakistan Air Force. The data consisted of total number of cartridges fired in each month of the year, total number of birds and animals (stray dogs) shot in each month.

6.3.2 Data Analysis

For preliminary analysis, mean, standard deviation (S.D), standard error

(S.E) were calculated by using descriptive statistics. For seasonal analysis, data were segregated into five seasons i.e. winter (Nov-Dec-Jan-Feb), spring (Mar-Apr) summer (May-Jun), monsoon (Jul-Aug) and fall (Sep-Oct). ANOVA was applied to observe any difference in number of birds or animals (stray dogs) shot in each season using SPSS (version 17). Correlation between number of birds or other

159

animals (stray dogs) shot and cartridges used were also calculated. Success and failure rate of cartridges fired was calculated following Moulten and Cropper Jr.,

(2014). Per unit cartridge price was Pak. Rs. 35/- (US$ 0.35). Economic cost of shooting was also estimated.

6.4 RESULTS

Three year (2011-2013) shooting data obtained from the records of BBIA is presented in Table 6.1. The data presents number of cartridges fired, number of bird and other animals (stray dogs) shot. Mean monthly distribution of shooting data is presented in Table 6.2. Analysis revealed that on average 775 ± 72 (S.E)cartridges were fired per month, 298 ± 57 (S.E) birds were killed and 26 ± 3 (S.E) animals

(stray dogs) were shot per month during the three year period with total success rate of 42 percent.

In total 27,890 cartridges were fired during 2011-2013. Total number of birds shot was 10,727 and total animals (stray dogs) killed were 942. The ratio between number of cartridges fired and number of birds killed was 3:1. Maximum numbers of birds (4242) shot were in the year 2012. Mean number of cartridges fired per annum was 9297 ± 420 (S.E). On average 3,576 ± 615 (S.E) birds and 314 ±

94 (S.E) animals (stray dogs) were shot during the year 2011-2013.

Comparison of these results with bird strike data of 2012 revealed that strike rate remained low (only 23 strike) in 2012. On the other hand, when less number of birds (3029) was shot in the year 2011, maximum bird strike incidents

160

(39) were recorded in that year. In the year 2013, 3456 birds were killed as a result of shooting and number of bird strike incidents was 33 during the year 2013.

Comparison of shooting data on seasonal basis i.e. winter (Nov-Feb), spring

(Mar-Apr), summer (May-Jun), monsoon (Jul-Aug) and fall (Sep-Oct) revealed that there was non-significant difference (p > 0.05) between numbers of birds shot in all five seasons (Fig. 6.2). The results of multiple comparison of five seasons (LSD) were also non-significant with seasons. Correlation between number of bird shot and cartridges fired was highly significant (P < 0.01). The correlation coefficient was 0.696, indicating strong relationship between cartridges fired and birds shot.

Mean monthly cost on cartridges used was Pak Rs. 27,125 (279 US$). Per animal cost was calculated Pak Rs. 84 (0.86 US$). Mean annual cost of cartridges used was estimated as Pak Rs. 325,383 ± 14685 (S.E) and US$ 3579 ± 73 (S.E).

161

Table 6.1: Past three years (2011-13) shooting data of BBIA, Islamabad

2011 2012 2013

Month Cartridges fired Birds shot Animals Cartridges Birds shot Animals Cartridges Birds Animals (stray dogs) shot fired (stray fired shot (stray dogs) dogs) shot shot Jan 695 156 15 682 237 26 689 190 23 Feb 734 154 12 718 338 34 643 174 29 Mar 644 285 12 1008 488 43 859 342 36 Apr 717 256 15 448 234 39 750 285 27 May 965 356 19 569 239 33 650 263 23 Jun 1185 637 15 600 230 35 750 285 27 Jul 590 194 14 1048 568 39 872 297 41 Aug 580 124 14 817 556 32 909 316 38 Sep 609 123 15 683 463 29 1028 334 31 Oct 679 191 18 787 320 39 910 319 8 Nov 636 238 32 1027 329 25 884 306 18 Dec 838 315 36 920 240 31 767 345 19 Mean±SE 739 ± 51 252 ± 41 18 ± 2.2 776 ± 56 353 ± 38 34 ± 1.6 809 ± 34 288 ± 16 27 ± 2.69

162

Table 6.2: Mean monthly distribution and percentage of success of shooting at BBIA, Islamabad (2011-2013)

Months Mean Mean Mean Mean Percentage monthly monthly monthly monthly of cart. birds animals bird/animals success used shot (stray (stray dogs) dogs) shots shot

Jan 689 194 21 216 31

Feb 698 222 25 247 35

Mar 837 372 30 402 48

Apr 638 258 27 285 45

May 728 286 25 311 43

Jun 845 384 26 410 48

Jul 837 353 31 384 46

Aug 769 332 28 360 47

Sep 773 307 25 332 43

Oct 792 277 22 298 38

Nov 849 291 25 316 37

Dec 842 300 29 329 39

Mean ± 775 ± 72 298 ± 57 26 ± 3 324 ± 59 42 S.E

163

Table 6.3: Annual distribution of shooting data of BBIA (2011-2013)

2011 2012 2013 Mean ± SE

No. of cartridges fired 8872 9307 9711 9297 ± 242

No. of birds shot 3029 4242 3456 3576 ± 355

No. of animals (stray 217 405 320 314 ± 54 dogs) shot

164

Catridges Birds shot

12000

10000

8000

6000

4000

2000 No.of catridges and birdshot 0 2011 2012 2013 Year

Fig 6.1: No. of cartridges fired and birds shot per year at BBIA (2011-2013)

450 400

350

SE)

± 300 250 200 150

Birds(Meanshot 100 50 0 winter spring summer Monsoon Fall Seasons

Fig 6.2: Number (mean ± S.E) of birds shot in five seasons during (2011-2013) at BBIA, Islamabad

165

Monthly success rate of shooting at BBIA 60

20 % Success % Success of shooting 10

0 Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Month

Fig 6.3: Monthly success rate (percent) of shooting at BBIA (2011-2013).

166

Table 6.4: Cost of shot per bird or animal (stray dog) killed.

Shooting Monthly cost of Cost per cartridges bird/animal Month Cartridges Success, n US$* US$ fired (n) (percent) Pak. Rs. Pak. Rs.

Jan 689 216 (28) 24115 248 112 1.15

Feb 698 247 (32) 24430 251 99 1.02

Mar 837 402 (44) 29295 301 73 0.75

Apr 638 285 (40) 22330 230 78 0.80

May 728 311 (39) 25480 262 82 0.84

Jun 845 410 (45) 29575 304 72 0.74

Jul 837 384 (42) 29295 301 76 0.78

Aug 769 360 (43) 26915 277 75 0.77

Sep 773 332 (40) 27055 278 81 0.83

Oct 792 298 (35) 27720 285 93 0.96

Nov 849 316 (34) 29715 305 94 0.97

Dec 842 329 (36) 29470 303 90 0.93

Mean± 775 ± 194 324 (38) 27125 279 84 0.86 SE

*US $=Pak Rs. 97.27 as on 1st Jan. 2013

167

Table 6.5: Annual cost of cartridges fired at BBIA during (2011-2013)

Description 2011 2012 2013 Mean ± SE

Total No. of 8872 9307 9711 9297 ± 242 cartridges fired

Annual cost in Pak. 310520 325745 339885 325383 ± 8478 Rs.

Annual cost in US$ 3621 3621 3494 3579 ± 42

168

6.5 DISCUSSION

Both birds and other animals; mainly stray dogs, that came inside the boundary wall from broken fences in the perimeter and would cross the runway during landing and taking off hence constituting a hazard to the approaching aircraft, were killed as a result of shooting at BBIA, Islamabad. Number of birds killed at the airfield was about ten times more than number of animals (stray dogs) shot. This could be attributed to the abundance of commonly found bird species in the vicinity of the airport i.e. kite (Milvus migrans), house crow (Corvus splendens), common myna (Acridotheres tristis), house sparrow (Passer domesticus) and pigeon (Columba livia) as recorded by our own observations in (Chapter 3).

Langley (1970) reported that flock of small sized birds such as starlings (Sturnus vulgaris), black birds (Turdus merula), house sparrow (Passer domesticus) and various buntings frequently land on airport grounds for feeding, nesting and roosting and thus constitute a hazard

The airport environment itself is highly conducive for birds‟ activities. A number of factors attract birds at the airfield. These include standing water near runways after rainy days and water in a ditch near under shoot 12 (Fig. 2.15). Birds are attracted near water sources for drinking and bathing purpose (Wright, 1968).

According to Burger (1983) all fresh water ponds or standing water on runways or parking lots should be removed, as this would reduce the number of birds coming on the airfield for drinking purpose and hence less number of birds will be killed as a result of shooting.

169

Unless basic attractants are removed birds will remain at the airfield and the authorities will have to spend money, time and labor on practices like shooting scaring and killings of birds. Although number of animals killed (stray dogs) were less than number of birds shot, however there is a need to maintain bird and animal free environment at least in the vicinity of the airfield. Broken meshes, walls and open drains Fig. 2.11 (Chapter 2) should be repaired to control entry of these animals.

There is a dire need to control off-air field bird attraction sites in order to reduce influx of bird inside the boundaries of the airport. The environmental control team should make frequent visits in the surrounding area of the airport and take appropriate control methods for reducing the bird hazard.

An inverse relationship was found between number of birds (mainly kites) killed as a result of shooting and bird strike incidents at BBIA. Less number of bird strikes in the year 2012 could be attributed to maximum number of birds shot in that year. Similar results have been reported by Dolbeer et al. (1993) and Dolbeer and Bucknal, (1998) at John F. Kennedy International Airport

(JFKIA), where shooting and killing of 52,235 gulls reduced its strikes with aeroplanes.

Analysis of shooting data on monthly basis revealed that maximum numbers of birds were shot during the month of June which could be related to less number of kites (Chapter 4) as well as increased rate of shooting success during this month.

Higher shooting success in the months of March, July and August could be attributed to the fledging of juvenile birds (especially kites) and availability of more natural

170

food (small mammals, insects etc.) in monsoon season. Minimum numbers of birds were shot during the months of January and February. This is the period when most of the female kites were observed sitting near their nests. However, seasonal analysis of shooting data revealed that there was no statistically significant difference between number of birds shot in the periods (Nov-Feb), (Mar-Jun) and

(Jul-Oct). This could be due to the fact that most of the species killed as result of shooting are resident species and are present all year round.

Success rate of shooting at BBIA remained only 42 percent. Review of reports on airport shooting program by Dolbeer (1998) indicated that shooting can reduce bird strikes more effectively if use in combination with other methods.

So an integrated approach for managing bird hazard at BBIA would be more meaningful. In addition to shooting other scaring methods must be applied.

Dolbeer (1998) explained that shooting in combination with falconry reduced the mean number of bird strikes at John F Kennedy International Airport, US.

Shooting has an economic cost which involves not only labor, time, energy and resources but also requires vigilance an experience. The huge amount of money spent on shooting could be reduced by making airport environment less attractant to the birds. Expenditure on habitat management, waste disposal, auditory and visual repellents and on exclusion methods like netting, use of bird balls, wires and spikes would provide long term solution of the problem. Cost could be reduced by managing not only the airport environment but also by monitoring the off airfield situation which has many bird attractant sites like open garbage dumps,

171

nesting, roosting and feeding sites for hazardous bird species. Information and suggestions provided in this section on bird shooting practice could be incorporated into bird control program of BBIA. More purpose oriented and quantitative analyses are required so that the effectiveness of shooting, in comparison with other control methods, could be evaluated under different circumstances. Management efforts could be intensified in the periods of high bird activity and other bird dispersal method could also be used along with shooting in order to get maximum results. Beside their shooting program BBIA should continue their effort to develop site specific Bird Hazard Management Plan including habitat management and the use of various effective bird deterrent techniques to prevent different bird species using their airport.

6.6 Evaluation of Scare Crows at BBIA

Another technique evaluated in Jan-May (2009) for its repellency at BBIA was impact of scare crows on birds‟ number (though scare crows would not get rid of kites, however, these were meant to scare other birds). Scare crows are the most traditional devices used in agricultural fields to repel birds (Hussain, 1990).

Usually they are made up of inexpensive materials such as sacks, old cloths, plastics etc to mimic the human effigy. Birds respond to this visual stimulus and are discouraged to come to the places mounted with scare crows. This practice is also common in airfields. Research studies have shown that scare crows are not effective when used in isolation (Conover, 1983; Boag and Lewin, 1980). Mobile scare crows that are mounted on a vehicle or moved by wind are more effective than stationary scare crows (Littauer, 1990).

172

6.7 Specification of Scare Crows mounted at BBIA

Civil Aviation Health, Security and Environment (HSE) Department of

BBIA, Islamabad is responsible for controlling and managing habitat of the airport. Five scaring devices were placed on either side of the runway, three on one side and two on the other. Distance between each scaring device was 45 m. These devices were first used in Mianwali where crows were the problem according to PAF authorities.

Each rectangular movable metallic device (0.76 m × 0.45 m) was mounted on a pole 1.5 m in height. The base of each device was white in colour, two eyes and a nose resembling owl like face were painted in black (Fig 6.4). These devices were movable at the joining end and could rotate with wind.

In order to evaluate the efficacy of these devices, data on birds‟ number were collected from two sites. Site 1 was where devices were placed and the other plot representing site 2, near 30 end, was without these devices. Data sheets were developed and handed over to the field staff. Only five months data, Jan – May

(2009), could be obtained from the airport authorities. These devices were removed in 2009 by the airport authorities due to their own internal evaluation as they were not serving the purpose of scaring. Birds mainly crows and myna were habituated and were seen using these devices as their perching sites. The data consisted of total number of birds observed at each site within fixed quadrate of 50 m x 50 m, for about 10-15 minutes, where scaring devices were placed and number of birds observed in plot without these devices. In total 30 observations for each site was

173

taken. Data were entered in SPSS and were tested for equality of means by using t-test.

6.8 Outcome of the study

Mean number of birds, recorded at site 1 with scare crows, were 1.2 ±

0.23(S.E) and at site 2 without scare crow were 1.76 ±0 31(S.E). However, results of t-test revealed non-significant difference (P > 0. 05) in birds number visiting site 1

(with scare crow) and site 2 without scare crows.

It was evident from the data analysis that those five scaring devices implanted at BBIA were proven ineffective within five month. Birds habituated and started settling on these devices. As a result of which these devices were removed by the authorities. Studies also confirm that scare crow devices do not work effectively when used in isolation or they are effective for shorter period of time because the species start habituating on these devices (Hothem and De Haven, 1982). By moving these devices every 2-3 day would make it more effective for bird repellency (Hussain, 1990). One of the reasons of inefficiency of this deterrent method at BBIA could be that those devices were being used in isolation.

Studies suggest that movable scare crow‟s efficiency could be enhanced when used in conjugation with gas cannons (Harris and Davis, 1998). Another reason of failure of this device could be that it was painted in white and became very dull with the passage of time. According to Littauer (1990) painting scare crow in bright color can increase their delectability. These are short term solutions for scaring birds could not be used for long term. However, their efficacy can be enhanced by using them in conjugation with other deterring methods.

174

0.76 m

0.45 m

1.5 m

Fig 6.4: Sketch of Scare crow device placed at BBIA during (2009)

Chapter 7

GENERAL DISCUSSION

Benazir Bhutto International Airport Islamabad is situated in thickly populated city of Rawalpindi in Pakistan. There were many bird attracting sites, within ICAO defined 13 km bird free circle, around the airport. Features like urbanization, insufficient and inefficient waste management system and other ecological factors like natural vegetation and water bodies attract potentially hazardous bird species. Similar factors have been identified in the US. The FAA,

Order 5200.5 A, provides a guideline for establishment, removal and monitoring of landfill sites, open dumps and waste disposal on or in the vicinity of airports as these areas provide abundant feeding nesting and roosting sites for bird species (Godin,

1994). Open garbage dumping sites adjacent to and in the vicinity of BBIA are of serious safety concern. Kites were found to be the main species of concern in this area, which were attracted to abundant and frequently available food in the numerous garbage dumps, present all around. Appropriate action should be taken to control this hazardous bird species found in the vicinity of the airport. Similar bird problem has been observed in other developing countries. Kites (Milvus migrans) were reported to be numerous and hazardous for aircraft operation and were attracted to huge quantities of food available in waste thrown out of slaughter houses and garbage dumps in the vicinity of aerodromes of India (Matthew et al.,1998). In Nepal also birds of prey were the major hazard, which were attracted to solid waste dumping sites in nearby jungle area providing nesting and roosting sites to the birds and garbage filling station near river bank in the close vicinity (Upadhyaya and Dolbeer, 2001).

175

176

Other ecological factors like presence of water bodies i.e. Lai, Soan and

Korang rivers and their tributaries in the surrounding area of BBIA also serve as bird attracting sites and provide ample food to the problem bird species. Special attention should be paid in these off airfield areas to monitor bird activity. Bird attracting features like standing water, vegetation and structures at the airport should be strictly monitored. Dense vegetation at the airfield may attract birds for roosting and hence may result in a mishap. Habitat management could be one effective way to reduce the bird problem at BBIA. Coordination among agencies and public awareness on the issue is also an integral part of management efforts.

Occurrence of bird strikes at BBIA could be attributed to the presence or activity of common urban area bird species found in the vicinity of the airfield. These species include kite (Milvus migrans), house crow (Corvus splendens), common myna (Acridotheres tristis), house sparrow (Passer domesticus), dove (Zenaidan macroura) and feral pigeon (Columba livia) as recorded by our own observation and also reported by the airport authority. A variety of bird species are reported to be involved in bird strikes for example Dolbeer et al. (1993) had recorded at least 56 species of birds struck by aircraft at JFK

International Airport New York, from 1979-1992. Analysis of bird strike data provided by CAA revealed that birds of prey (kite and eagle) belonging to

Accipitriformes were involved in majority of the bird strike cases. Birds of prey usually soar at higher altitudes using thermal currents and are thus most likely to be struck with aircraft travelling at greater velocity, resulting in greater damage

(Buurma and Dekker, 1996).

177

Seasonal analysis of bird strike data of BBIA revealed that aircraft were more prone to bird strikes in monsoon (Jul-Aug) and in fall (Sep-Oct) with maximum bird strikes occurring in the month of September, then in July followed by

October and August. Similar results have been shown by Küsters‟ and Scheller,

(1998). Dolbeer (1998) also reported that months of July to October, especially

August, were the months with highest strike rate below 152 m altitude probably due to the addition of large number of recently fledged birds.

A nominal increasing trend (0.95 percent) in bird strike data (1999-2012) was observed at Nur Khan Airbase, PAF and in combined bird strike data (2005-2012) of

Habitat near BBIA is highly conducive for bird activity which in return is a serious safety concern for aircraft. Naturally preserved recreational areas, commercial habitats, habitat near water bodies, landfill sites housing societies and buildings with tall tree plantation showed abundance and diversity of bird species, thus, were creating possible potential problems to aircraft operations at

BBIA.

178

Bird behavior, feeding habits, nesting and roosting preferences and knowledge about breeding cycle could provide a clue for devising control measures for these bird species. It has been observed that most of the birds i.e. kites, crows, myna and egrets were feeding on open garbage dumps scattered all around in the surrounding area of the airport. Measures should be taken by the district, provincial and federal governments and other relevant agencies to remove garbage accumulation in the surroundings of BBIA on priority basis. Though different management techniques like habitat manipulation, de-nesting, scaring and shooting is being practiced at BBIA, however, it is unlikely that the airport authorities will be able to prevent bird strike risk arising from the bird prevalence in the vicinity of the BBIA due to the abundance of attractive sites in its surroundings.

In addition, these control methods have some economic cost which involves not only labor, time, energy and resources but also vigilance and experience. This cost could be reduced by managing not only the airport environment but also by monitoring the off airfield situation.

Keeping in mind the land use practices, bird densities, bird behavior, feeding preferences, breeding cycles, nesting and knowledge about roosting perching sites, an outcome of this study could help devising effective bird control measures to mitigate bird strike risk.

CONCLUSION

The main objectives of this study were to identify potentially hazardous species, their habitats and evaluation of management techniques at BBIA, Islamabad

Pakistan. Information based on the results of this study could assist airport authorities, identifying bird attracting sites and potentially hazardous bird species present in the vicinity of the aerodrome. Management efforts could be focused to these identified habitats. This information could be utilized to develop site specific bird management plan for BBIA, Islamabad.

Kites (Milvus migrans) were found to be the main species of concern in this area. In addition, naturally preserved recreational areas, commercial habitats, habitat near water bodies, landfill sites, housing societies, buildings with tall tree plantation and open garbage dumping sites also showed abundance and diversity of other bird species thus creating possible potential problems to aircraft operations at BBIA.

Analysis of past bird strike data revealed that a critical action needed to be done by the airport authorities is to maintain records systematically so that meaningful information could be drawn and on the basis of which preemptive measure could be taken. Correct identification of species struck is essential so that bird behavioral oriented management practices may be implemented. This would also help in focusing the management efforts to the target species. As CAA and PAF collect more precise data on bird strikes it will be possible to produce more refined analysis.

179

180

This study supports that monthly, yearly and seasonal fluctuations in mean number of birds, bird strikes and in management practices like shooting could be incorporated into bird control program. Management efforts could be intensified during the periods of high bird activity. Other bird dispersal methods could also be used along with shooting in order to get maximum results. More purpose oriented and quantitative analyses are required so that the effectiveness of bird control program implemented at BBIA could be evaluated and compared with other effective control methods.

Shooting has an economic cost which involves not only labor, time, energy and resources but also requires vigilance and experience. This cost could be reduced by managing not only the airport environment but also by monitoring the off airfield situation which has many bird attracting sites. Beside the shooting program BBIA should continue their effort to develop site specific Bird Hazard

Management Plan including habitat management and the use various effective bird deterrent techniques to prevent different bird species from using their airport. The money spent on shooting could be spent on managing airport habitat to have bird free environment.

Control measures should not only be focused only at airfield but actions should also be taken by the authorities for handling off airfield situation too, where actual hazard lies beyond the boundaries of the aerodrome which may become unsafe for aircraft movement.

National and International rules and regulations on bird control measures, as

181

mentioned in the ICAO and Civil Aviation Rule 1994, must be implemented by the concerned authorities. All concerned departments like airport bird control unit, CAA,

PAF, local municipal administration and law enforcement agencies must work together in harmony to ensure public safety of all those who fly.

Despite the fact that there are national and international rules and regulations on public safety in air, however, implementation of these rules and regulation vary from country to country. In a developing country like Pakistan certain impediments such as lack of resources and low level of expertise cause difficulty for tackling such issues of public safety. International Organizations like UN and their working agencies should provide guidelines to bridge the gap, in recommended practices, between developing and developed countries, so that these issues of high priority must not be compromised.

SUMMARY

The present study was conducted to assess bird problem and associated hazards to aviation operation at Benazir Bhutto International Airport, Islamabad.

To gather some basic information about the study area and to explore the potential bird attracting sites at and in the vicinity of the airfield, a vehicle based reconnaissance survey, within 8 km radius, of the airport was carried out in

(2011-2012). Results suggested that there were many bird attracting sites lying within 8 km radius of the airport. Three main water bodies Lai, Korang and Soan surrounded the airfield. Fourteen public parks and six sports ground were identified in this radius. Twenty one open garbage dumps were found within 0.2-1.5 km radius of the airport. These sites provided ample feeding, nesting and roosting sites to potentially hazardous bird species.

Past bird strike records of BBIA, Islamabad and that of PAF Base Nur

Khan (2005-2012) were reviewed to explore bird strike trend at this airport.

Analysis of bird strike data revealed that annual average number of bird strikes were 26.62 ± 0.58 (S.E). Types of birds involved in strikes, with civil aircraft, were recorded only in 43 percent of all known strikes. In 57 percent of strikes species remained unidentified. Birds of prey were involved in 72 percent of all known strikes (mainly kites). Small and medium sized bird constituted 14 percent each. Thirty percent of all reported strikes with civil aircraft, resulted in some damage. Analysis of damage by parts suggested that engine damage was the cause of

92 percent of the accidents. Windshields were involved in 8 percent cases. Types of

182

183

aircraft involved were also explored which revealed that A-310 accounted for 36 percent, B-373 for 19 percent, B-777 and ATR 10 percent each, B-747 for 5 percent,

A-300, A-319, A-320, A-321 and A-332 two percent each. The seasonal variation in bird strikes was also envisaged by using Kruskal Wallis test. The results showed statistically significant difference (p < 0.01) between numbers of bird strikes occurred in all five seasons. Maximum strikes occurred during fall

(September-October), then in monsoon (July-Aug) followed by summer

(May-June) and spring (March-April) and least during winter (November-February).

Relationship between meteorological and bird strike data suggested that there was a significant positive correlation between bird strikes and maximum temperature (r =

0.452, p < 0.01), minimum temperature (r = 0.422, p < 0.01), and rainfall (r = 0.242, p < 0.01). Positive regression coefficient (0.46) also indicated an increasing trend in bird strikes at BBIA, Islamabad.

Habitat survey for identification of hazardous bird species was carried out at

8 selected study sites within 8 km radius of BBIA. Each site represented a different habitat. For habitat analysis each site was ranked for the presence of bird attraction site against 17 parameters. Habitats were ranked by using Habitat

Composite Index (HCI). Site three representing naturally preserved recreational area (Ayub National Park) showed highest rank (9.7) for the presence of bird attraction sites. Thirty four bird species were recorded in the area but we mainly focused on 10 species of interest and our target bird species i.e. kite (Milvus migrans). Mean number of kite in all study sites was 24.2 ± 48.26 (S.E) and its mean density was 0.003083 per square meter. Highest number of kites was observed in the

184

month of May followed by June then in September and August. To investigate effect of seasonality on mean number of kite, monthly data were grouped into five seasons i.e. winter (Nov-Feb), spring (Mar-Apr), summer (May-June), monsoon (Jul-Aug) and fall (Sep-Oct). ANOVA was applied to observe difference in kite number in each season. Significant difference (p < 0.01) was observed in all five seasons. However,

Least Square Difference (LSD) revealed significantly higher number of birds (p <

0.05) during fall, summer and monsoon as compared to winter and spring seasons.

Furthermore, the kite count was significantly higher (p < 0.05) during fall than those recorded in summer and monsoon seasons. Hourly distribution pattern of kite movement peaked at 1430-1500 till 1700.

For evaluation of management practices three year shooting data of BBIA

(2011-13) were provided by the PAF. The data represented monthly and yearly records of number of cartridges fired, number of birds shot and number of animals

(stray dogs) killed. Number of mean monthly cartridges fired during three year period was 775 ± 72 (S.E), mean monthly birds shot were recorded 298 ± 57 (S.E).

Mean monthly animals (stray dogs) killed were 26 ± 3 (S.E). Mean success rate of cartridges fired was 42 percent. When tested for seasonality by applying ANOVA, no significant difference (p > 0.05) was observed in birds shot during all five seasons of winter, spring, summer, monsoon and fall. Mean monthly cost on cartridges used was Pak Rs. 27,125 (279 US $). Cost per animal or bird killed was

Pak Rs.84 (0.86 US$). Annual cost on cartridges was Pak Rs. 325,383 ± 1485 (S.E)

(3,579 ± 73 US$). Scare crow devices were proven to be ineffective after some time and were removed from BBIA in 2009.

LITERATURE CITED

Allan, J. R., J. C. Bell and V. S. Jackson. 1999. An assessment of the world-wide

risk to aircraft from large flocking birds. Bird Strike Committee-US/Canada,

1st Joint Annual Meeting, Vancouver, B. C. p.1-9.

Allan, J. R. and A. P. Orosz. 2001. The costs of bird strikes to commercial aviation.

Bird Strike Committee-USA/Canada, 3rd Joint Annual Meeting, Calgary,

AB. Paper 2, p. 218-226.

Allan, J. R. and L. A. Watson. 1990. The impact of a lumbricide treatment on the

fauna of airfield grassland. Bird Strike Committee, Europe, 20th Meeting,

Helsinki, Finland. Paper 47, p. 531-541.

Anderson, J. M. 1986. Merganser Predation and its Impact on Atlantic Salmon

Stocks in the Restigouche River System in 1982-1985. Atlantic Salmon

Federation, St. Andrew, N. B., Canada. 66 pp.

Australian Transport Safety Bureau (ATSB). 2002. The hazard posed to aircraft by

birds. Australian Transport Safety Bureau, Australian Capital Territory. 48

pp.

Barras, S. C. and T. W. Seamans. 2002. Habitat management approaches for

reducing wildlife use of airfields. In: Timm, R. M. (ed.), Proc. 20th

Vertebrate Pest Conference, University of California, Davis, California,

185

186

USA. p. 309-315.

Belant, J. L. 1997. Gulls in urban environments: landscape-level management to

reduce conflict. Landscape and Urban Plan., 38: 245-258.

Belant, J. L. and J. A. Martin. 2011. Bird Harassment, Repellent, and Deterrent

Techniques for Use on and Near Airports. Airport Cooperative Research

Program Synthesis, Transportation Research Board of the National

Academies, Washington, D. C., USA. 44 pp.

Boag, D. A. and V. Lewin. 1980. Effectiveness of three waterfowl deterrents on

natural and polluted ponds. J. Wildl. Manage., 44: 145-154.

Burger, J. 1983. Birds control at airports. Environ. Conserv., 10: 5-9.

Burger, J. 1985. Factors affecting bird strikes on aircraft at a coastal airport. Biol.

Conserv., 33: 1-28.

Buurma, L. and A. Dekker. 1996. Eurobase: Potential lessons from military bird

strike statistics. Bird Strike Committee Europe, 23rd Meeting, London. Paper

6, p. 81-89.

Carter, N. B. 2001. All birds are not created equal: Risk assessment and

prioritization of wildlife hazard at airfields. Bird Strike

Committee-USA/Canada, 3rd Joint Annual Meeting, Calgary, AB. Paper 8,

187

p. 22-30.

Cleary, E. C. and R. A. Dolbeer. 1999. Wildlife Hazard Management at Airports: A

Manual for Airport Personnel. U. S. Department of Transportation, Federal

Aviation Administration and Office of Airport Safety and Standards,

Washington, D. C., USA. 248 pp.

Cleary, E. C. and R. A. Dolbeer. 2005. Wildlife Hazard Management at Airports: A

Manual for Airport Personnel. 2nd ed., U. S. Department of Transportation,

Federal Aviation Administration, Office of Airport Safety and Standards,

Washington, D. C., USA. 348 pp.

Cleary, E. C., R. A. Dolbeer and S. E. Wright. 2006. Wildlife Strikes to Civilian

Aircraft in the United States 1990-2005. U. S. Department of Transportation,

Federal Aviation Administration, National Wildlife Strike Database, Serial

Report Number 12, Washington, D. C, USA. 64 pp.

Conover, M. R. 1983. Pole-bound hawk-kites failed to protect maturing cornfields

from blackbird damage. In: Jackson, W. B. and B. J. Dodd (eds.), Proc. 9th

Bird Control Seminar, Bowling Green State Univ., Bowling Green, Ohio. p.

85-90.

Conover, M. R. 2002. Resolving Human-Wildlife Conflicts: The Science of

Wildlife Damage Management, CRC Press, Boca Raton, Florida, USA. 440

pp.

188

De Fusco, R. P. and J. G. Nagy. 1983. Frightening Devices for Airfield Bird Control.

Colorado State Univ., Fort Collins. 78 pp.

De Vault, T. L., B. F. Blackwell and J. L. Belant, (eds.). 2013. Wildlife in Airport

Environments: Preventing Animal-Aircraft Collisions through

Science-Based Management. The Johns Hopkins University Press,

Baltimore, Maryland, USA. 181 pp.

Dolbeer, R. A. 1998. Evaluation of shooting and falconry to reduce bird strikes with

aircraft at John F. Kennedy International Airport. International Bird Strike

Committee, 24th Meeting, Stara Lesna, Slovakia. Paper 13, p. 145-153.

Dolbeer, R. A. 1998. Population dynamics: the foundation of wildlife damage

management for the 21st century. In: R. O. Baker and C. Crabb (eds.), Proc.

18th Vertebrate Pest Conference. University of California, Davis, California,

USA. p. 2-11.

Dolbeer, R. A. 2000. Birds and aircraft: fighting for airspace in ever more crowded

skies. Hum. Wildl. Confl., 3:165-166.

Dolbeer, R. A. 2006. Height distribution of birds recorded by collisions with

aircraft. J. Wildl. Manage., 70: 1345-1350.

Dolbeer, R. A. and J. L. Bucknall. 1994. Shooting gulls reduces strikes with aircraft

at John F. Kennedy International Airport.1991-1993. Bird Strike Committee

189

Europe, 22nd Meeting, Vienna. Paper, 60, p. 375-396.

Dolbeer, R. A. and J. L. Bucknall. 1998. Shooting gulls to reduce strikes with

aircraft at John F. Kennedy International Airport, 1991-1997. Spec. Rep. for

Port Authority of N. Y. and N. J. by U.S. Dep. Agric., National Wildl. Res.

Cent., Sandusky, OH. 33 pp.

Dolbeer, R. A. and P. Eschenfelder. 2003. Amplified bird-strike risks related to

population increases of large birds in North America. International Bird

Strike Committee, 26th Meeting, Warsaw, Poland. Paper OS4, p. 49-67.

Dolbeer, R. A., D. P. Arrington, E. LeBoeuf, and C. Atkins. 1996. Can Albatrosses

and aircraft coexist on Midway Atoll? Bird Strike Committee Europe, 23rd

Meeting, London. Paper 34, p. 327-335.

Dolbeer, R. A., J. L. Belant, and J. L. Sillings. 1993. Shooting gulls reduces strikes

with aircraft at John F. Kennedy International Airport. Wildl. Soc. Bull., 21:

442-450.

Dolbeer, R. A., S. E. Wright and E. C. Cleary. 2000. Ranking the hazard level of

wildlife species to aviation. Wildl. Soc. Bull., 28: 373-378.

Dolbeer, R. A., S. E. Wright, J. Weller, and M. J. Begier. 2011. Wildlife Strikes to

Civil Aircraft in the United States, 1990-2010. Rep. No. 17, U. S.

Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Office of

190

Airport Safety Standards, Washington, D. C., USA. 84 pp.

Fischer, C. E. C. 1923. Drongo and Cicada. J. Bombay Nat. Hist. Soc., 29: 839-840.

Frings, H. and M. Frings. 1967. Behavioral Manipulation (Visual, Mechanical, and

Acoustical). In: W. W. Kilgor and R. L. Doutt (eds.), Pest Control:

Biological, Physical and Selected Chemical Methods. Academic Press, NY.

p. 387-454.

Gabrey, S. W. and R. A. Dolbeer. 1996. Rainfall effects on bird-aircraft collisions at

two United States airports. Wildl. Soc. Bull., 24: 272-275.

Godin, A. J. 1994. Birds at Airorts. In: S. E. Hygnstrom, R. M. Timm, and G. E.

Larsen (eds.), The Handbook: Prevention and Control of Wildlife Damage.

Cooperative Extension Service, University of Nebraska, Lincoln, USA. p.

E1-E4.

Harris, R. E. and Davis, R. A. 1998. Evaluation of the Efficacy of Products and

Techniques for Airport Bird Control. LGL report TA 2193 to Aerodrome

Safety Branch, Transport Canada. 107 pp.

Hild, J. 1978. How to make an airport unattractive to birds. Airport Forum, 17:

49-56.

Hothem, R. L. and R. W. DeHaven. 1982. Raptor-mimicking kites for reducing bird

191

damage to wine grapes. In: Marsh. R. E. (ed.). Proc. 10th Vertebrate. Pest

Conference, Hyatt Del Monte, Monterey, California, USA. p. 171-178.

Hussain, I. 1990. Trapping, netting and scaring techniques for bird control. In: J. E.

Brooks, E. Ahmad, I. Hussain, S. Munir and A. Khan (eds.), A Training

Manual on Vertebrate Pest Management. Pakistan Agric. Res. Council,

Islamabad, Pakistan. p. 187-191.

Hutto, R. L., M. P. Letschet and P. Hendricks. 1986. A fixed-radius point count

method for non breeding and breeding season use. Auk, 103: 593-602.

Ickes, S. I., J. L. Belant, and R. A. Dolbeer. 1998. Nest disturbance techniques to

control nesting by gulls. Wildl. Soc. Bull., 26: 269-273.

International Civil Aviation Organization. 1989. Manual on the ICAO Bird Strike

Information System (IBIS). 3rd ed., Montreal, Quebec, Canada.

International Civil Aviation Organization. 2012. Airport Service Manual (Doc

9137), Part 3, Wildlife Control and Reduction. 4th ed., Montreal, Quebec,

Canada.

International Civil Aviation Organization. 2012. Convention on International Civil

Aviation (Aerodromes), Annex 14. 4th ed., Montreal, Quebec, Canada.

Jacoby, V. 1998. Analysis of bird strikes to ex-soviet union air force in East

192

Germany, 1970-1980, 1985-1991. International Bird Strike Committee, 24th

Meeting, Stara Lesna, Slovakia. Paper 5, p. 1-11.

Jerdon, T. C. 1863. Birds of India, vol. II. Military Orphan Press, Calcutta. 439 pp.

Kelly, T. C., R. Bolger and M. J. A, O‟Callaghan. 2001. Seasonality of bird strikes:

Towards a behavioral explanation. Bird Strike Committee-USA/Canada, 3rd

Joint Annual Meeting, Calgary, AB. p. 205-208.

Khan, A. A. 1998. Air accidents in spite of high efficiency. Def. J. (Pakis.), Aug.

1998 issue. www.defencejournal.com/aug98/airaccidents.htm.

Kocatas, A. 1992. Applications of various biodiversity indices to benthic macro

invertebrate assemblages in streams of a national park in Turkey. Rev.

Hydrobiol., 3: 111-125.

Koski, W. R. and W. J. Richardson. 1976. Review of water deterrent and dispersal

system for oil spills. Rep. from LGL Ltd., Toronto, Ont., for Petrol. Asoc.

Conserv. Can. Environ., PACE Rep. No. 76-6, Ottawa. 122 pp.

Küsters and Scheller. 1998. Bird strikes with military aircraft and flight altitudes of

raptors in Germany. International Bird Strike Committee, 24th Meeting,

Stara Lesna, Slovakia. Paper 26, p. 1-8.

Langley, M. 1970. The bird strike problem. Sci. J., 6: 55-60.

193

Linnell, M. A., M. R. Conover and T. J. Ohashi. 1996. Analysis of bird strikes at

tropical Airport. J. Wildl. Manage., 60: 935-945.

Littauer, G. 1990. Avian Predators: Frightening techniques for reducing bird

damage at aquaculture facilities. Southern Regional Aquaculture Center,

Publication No. 401, Louisiana Cooperative Extensive Service, Louisiana

State University Agricultural Center, Louisiana. 4 pp.

Mandaville, S. M. 2002. Benthic Macroinvertebrates in Freshwaters–Taxa

Tolerance Values, Metrics and Protocols, Project H-I, Nova Scotia: Soil and

Water Conservation Society of Metro Halifax. 48 pp.

Manktelow, S. 2000. The effect of local weather conditions on bird-aircraft

collisions at British Airports. International Bird Strike Committee, 25th

Meeting, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. Paper BB4, p. 317-329.

Matthew, D. N., S. Sreekumar, K. T. Joseph, M. Gangadharan, T. T. Jacob and M.

Mahesh Kumar. 1998. Experiences of the voluntary zoologist and experts of

the Calicut University, in reducing bird hazards in the aerodromes of

Trivandrum, Cochin, Calicut, Mangalore and Ramnad, India. International

Bird Strike Committee, 24th Meeting, Stara Lesna, Slovakia. Paper 16, p

1-15.

194

McCracken , P. R. 1976. Bird strikes and the air force. In: Jackson, W. B. (ed.) Proc.

7th Bird Control Seminar, Bowling Green State Univ., Bowling Green,

Ohio. p. 67-78.

Mirza, Z. B. 2007. A field Guide to Birds of Pakistan. WWF, Pakistan. 342 pp.

Moulton, M. P. and W. P. Cropper Jr. 2014. A comparison of success rates of

introduced passeriform birds in New Zealand, Australia and the United

States. PeerJ, 2: e 509.

Neubauer, J. C. 1990. Why birds kill: cross section analysis of U.S. Air Force bird

strike data. Aviat. Space Environ. Med., 61: 343-348.

Nomsen, D. E. 1989. Preventing waterfowl crop damage. In: Knittle, C. and Parker,

R. D. (eds.), Waterfowl, Ripening Grain Damage and Control Methods. U.S.

Fish Wildl. Serv., Washington, D. C., USA. p. 1-4.

Pyhala, M. 2001. Birds of Islamabad: Status and Seasonality.WWF, Pakistan. 131

pp.

Richardson, W. J. and West. 2000. Serious bird strike accidents to military aircraft:

updated list and summary. International Bird Strike Committee, 25th

Meeting, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. Paper, SA1, p. 67-98.

Roberts, T. J. 1991. The Birds of Pakistan, vol. I, Non Passeriformes. Oxford

195

University Press, Elite Publications Limited, Karachi, Pakistan. 598 pp.

Roberts, T. J. 1992. The Birds of Pakistan, vol. II, Passeriformes. Oxford University

Press, Elite Publications Limited, Karachi, Pakistan. 617 pp.

Robinson, M. 1997. The potential for a significant financials loss resulting from

aircraft in bird strike in or around an airport. Bird Strike Committee Europe,

23rd Meeting, London. p.353-367.

Servoss, W., R. M. Engeman, S. Fairaizl, J. L. Cummings and N. P. Groninger.

2000. Wildlife hazard assessment for Phoenix Sky Harbor International

Airport. Int. Biodeterior. Biodegrad., 45: 111-127.

Skira, I. J. and J. E. Wapstra. 1990. Control of Silver Gulls in Tasmania. Corella, 14:

124-129.

Thorpe, J. 2003. Fatalities and destroyed aircraft due to bird strikes, 1912-2002.

International Bird Strike Committee, 26th Meeting, Warsaw, Poland. Paper

SA1, p. 1-28.

Thorpe, J. 2005. Fatalities and destroyed aircraft due to bird strikes, 2002-2004

(with an appendix of animal strikes). International Bird Strike Committee

27th Meeting, Athens, Greece. Paper II-3, p. 1-9.

Thorpe, J. 2010. Update on fatalities and destroyed civil aircraft due to bird strikes

196

with appendix for 2008-2009. International Bird Strike Committee, 29th

Meeting, Cairns, Australia. p. 1-9.

Thrope, J. 1998. The implication of recent serious bird strike accidents and multiple

engine ingestion. International Bird Strike Committee, 24th Meeting, Stara

Lesna, Slovakia. Paper 3, p. 1-11.

Upadhyaya, B. K. and R. A. Dolbeer. 2001. Management of bird and other wildlife

hazards at Tribhuvan International Airport, Kathmandu, Nepal. Bird Strike

Committee USA/Canada, 3rd Joint Annual Meeting, Calgary, AB. p.

179-185.

Verner, J. 1985. Assessment of counting techniques. In: R. F. Johnston, (ed.)

Current Ornithology, vol. II. Plenum Press, New York. p. 247-302.

Wang, J. 2010. Analysis of bird strikes in the United States.

ceatasmp.cee.illinois.edu/./National%20Bird%20Strike%20Analysis.pdf.

Washburn, B. E. 2007. Evaluation of trash transfer facilities as bird attractors. Final

Rep., U.S., Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration,

Office of Airport Safety and Standards, Washington, D. C., USA. 25 pp.

Washburn, B. E. and T. W. Seamans. 2007. Wildlife responses to vegetation height

management in cool season grassland. Rangeland Ecol. Manage., 60:

319-323.

197

Wenning, K. M., M. J. Begier, and R. A. Dolbeer. 2004. Wildlife hazard

management at airports: fifteen years of growth and progress for wildlife

services. In: Timm, R. M. and W. P. Gorenzel (eds.), Proc. 21st Vertebrate

Pest Conference, University of California, Davis, California, USA. p.

295-301.

Witmer, G. W. and J. W. Fantinato. 2003. Management of rodent population at

airports. In: K. A. Fagerstone and G. W. Witmer, (eds.), Proc. 10th Wildlife

Damage Management Conference, Hot Springs, Arkansas. p. 350-358.

Wright, E. N. 1968. Modification of the habitat as a means of bird control. In: R. K.

Murton and E. N. Wright, (eds.), The Problems of Birds as a Pest. Symposia

for the Institute of Biology, Academic Press, London. p. 97-116.

Zakrajsek, E. J. and J. A. Bissonette. 2005. Ranking the risk of wildlife species

hazardous to military aircraft. Wildl. Soc. Bull., 33: 258-264.

http://en.ria.ru/world/20101128/161533955.html

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xunhml_aircraft-bird-strike-hazard_auto

http://www.pakakhbar.com/civil/civilavi.html

https://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/orders_notices/index.../8467

198

www.afsc.saia.af/mil/AFSC/Bash.

www.aphis.gov.usda.gov/ws.

www.caapakistan.com.pk

www.caapakistan.com.pk/FS/FS-CARules.aspx

www.pbs.gov.pk/content/population-census

www.tc.gc.ca/CivilAviation/AerodromeAirNav/Standards/WildlifeControl/tp1354

9/menu.htm - 58k.

Annexure 1 Habitat survey for recognizing bird attractants

Sr. Item location Score Comments No.

Agriculture (especially 1 grains) Aquaculture facility Livestock feed lots Grain storage facility Commercial/ recreational 2 land use Restaurants (especially

outdoor eating areas) Picnic areas, parks Golf course Building used for nesting‟s 3 Waste management Garbage dumps Garbage transfer stations 4 Water sources Retention ponds Streams, ditches, Reservoirs, lakes, natural

ponds Water supply ponds Nesting, loafing, roosting, 5 feeding areas Natural preserves Nesting sites Roosting sites Marshes , swamps, mud

flats

Note: 0= not present; 1= present but no bird problem noted or anticipated; 2= site attracts some hazardous birds creating possible or potential problem, site should be monitored; 3= site creates significant wildlife hazard for airport, action should be taken.

199

200

Annexure 2 Identification of hazardous bird species

Name of site location strata/sampling Date weather method starting time finishing time total time length radius

Specie Number Distance Type Time Bird Frequency Remarks of of activity of contact contact contact (feeding, nesting, roosting)