COMPETITION in the AIR: BIRDS VERSUS AIRCRAFT Author(S) :Navjot S
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
COMPETITION IN THE AIR: BIRDS VERSUS AIRCRAFT Author(s) :Navjot S. Sodhi Source: The Auk, 119(3):587-595. 2002. Published By: The American Ornithologists' Union DOI: 10.1642/0004-8038(2002)119[0587:CITABV]2.0.CO;2 URL: http://www.bioone.org/doi/full/10.1642/0004-8038%282002%29119%5B0587%3ACITABV %5D2.0.CO%3B2 BioOne (www.bioone.org) is a a nonprofit, online aggregation of core research in the biological, ecological, and environmental sciences. BioOne provides a sustainable online platform for over 170 journals and books published by nonprofit societies, associations, museums, institutions, and presses. Your use of this PDF, the BioOne Web site, and all posted and associated content indicates your acceptance of BioOne’s Terms of Use, available at www.bioone.org/page/terms_of_use. Usage of BioOne content is strictly limited to personal, educational, and non-commercial use. Commercial inquiries or rights and permissions requests should be directed to the individual publisher as copyright holder. BioOne sees sustainable scholarly publishing as an inherently collaborative enterprise connecting authors, nonprofit publishers, academic institutions, research libraries, and research funders in the common goal of maximizing access to critical research. The Auk A Quarterly Journal of Ornithology Vol. 119 No. 3 July 2002 The Auk 119(3):587±595, 2002 PERSPECTIVES IN ORNITHOLOGY COMPETITION IN THE AIR: BIRDS VERSUS AIRCRAFT NAVJOT S. SODHI1 Department of Biological Sciences, National University of Singapore, Blk S2, 14 Science Drive 4, Singapore 117543, Republic of Singapore THE FIRST KNOWN aircraft fatality that was HUMAN SAFETY AND ECONOMICS directly attributable to a bird occurred in 1912, when a gull (Larus sp.) was caught in the con- Incidents. On average, the aircraft of the U.S. trol cables of an aircraft, causing it to crash. Air Force incur 2,500 bird strikes annually Since that time, aircraft have generally in- (Lovell 1997). Out of those, one human death creased in size to carry more passengers. Bird± occurs per 2,000 strikes (Neubauer 1990). Most aircraft con¯icts are becoming more common air crashes occur when a bird hits the wind- recently, which is possibly due to increased shield or is inducted into the engine. In terms numbers of both aircraft (e.g. an estimated 28 of civilian aircraft, over 5,000 bird strikes were million jets now take off in the United States as reported in the United States during 1999 compared to 18 million in 1980) and some alone. Between 1950 and 1999, 286 serious bird- kinds of bird species (e.g. Canada Geese [Branta related accidents of military aircraft (in which canadensis], in the United States have quadru- the aircraft were destroyed or there were fatal- pled to 2 million since 1985). Between 1990 and ities) occurred in 32 countries. Of those acci- 1998, there were an estimated 22,000 bird±air- dents, 63 were fatal, which resulted in 141 craft collisions in the United States, which cost deaths (Richardson and West 2000). These bird- an annual $400 million in aircraft repairs. This strike incidents, at least in some cases, are min- bird±aircraft con¯ict takes place around the imum estimates because pilots only report 20 world, although the species, situations, and se- to 30% of actual strikes (Burger 1985). Pilots are verity differ. It is estimated that at least 350 thought to underreport bird strikes either be- people have been killed in bird±aircraft colli- cause they are unaware of the strikes or because sions worldwide. of the inconvenience of ®ling reports (Solman Understanding bird±aircraft con¯ict is criti- 1978, Linnell et al. 1999, Brown and Hickling cal due to monetary reasons and the potential 2000). Sometimes, strikes by large bird species threat to human life. Despite the severity of the (.350 g) such as Brahminy Kites (Haliastur in- situation, bird±aircraft con¯ict has largely re- dus) and Cattle Egrets (Bubulcus ibis) go unre- mained on the fringes of rigorous ornithologi- ported by pilots (N. Sodhi pers. obs.). There- cal investigations, and sound ornithological fore, runway carcass searches must supplement understanding is still required to ®nd long- pilot reports to correctly evaluate the bird term management solutions for that con¯ict. I threat at airports. hope that this review will stimulate ornitholo- Economic losses. The cost of repairing an air- gists to show more interest in this crucial issue. craft damaged by a bird strike can vary from very little to millions of dollars when an air- 1 E-mail: [email protected] craft is lost. The aircraft component that is most 587 588 Perspectives in Ornithology [Auk, Vol. 119 frequently damaged by bird strikes is the en- uncommon and can result in loss of life and gine. International Civil Aviation Organiza- high costs. tion's (ICAO) analysis shows that bird strikes damaged 200 engines on or near airports WHY DO BIRDS COLLIDE WITH AIRCRAFT? around the world in 1996. The cost of repair due to bird ingestion can range from $250,000 Air®elds can provide good resources (e.g. to $1 million, depending on the type of engine. foraging and nesting sites) for some bird spe- However, there have been cases in which the cies (e.g. Kershner and Bollinger 1998). How- cost of aircraft repair has been as high as $6 ever, they can be hazardous habitats due to the million, as was the case for an Air France Con- danger of getting hit by an aircraft. The ability cord that was struck by a number of Canada to avoid an aircraft may involve learning to Geese in 1995 on approach to the John F. Ken- judge the threat and ¯ying in a manner to nedy International Airport in New York City. It evade it successfully. As bird strikes typically is predicted that bird±aircraft con¯ict will be- occur four to six times per 10,000 aircraft move- come costlier due to the plans for increased ments, it is possible that most individual birds numbers of wide-bodied jets in the air (Rob- succeed in evading an aircraft. However, it is inson 2000). critical to understand why evasive behavior The cost of the bird management program at does not always work. Birds should typically the Christchurch International Airport in New be good at sound and color signal detection. Zealand is about twice that of repairs to aircraft Those abilities, however, can vary with species that are damaged by bird strikes. However, that and individuals. How nutritional stress, paren- does not include the costs of lost ¯ight time, tal duties, disease, and ecotoxins (e.g. neuro- passenger disruption, and passenger safety toxins) affect a bird's ability to evade an aircraft (Chilvers et al. 1997). Annually, aircraft spend remains poorly understood (Kelly et al. 2000). 461,000 h on ground in the United States due to For example, carcasses versus live individuals bird strikes (Cleary et al. 1999). The cost of bird in airports can be compared to determine strikes in terms of human morbidity and mor- whether dead individuals have disproportion- tality has not been rigorously investigated ately more parasites. Therefore, exciting re- (Neubauer 1990). One human fatality can cost search avenues remain open to understand up to $2.5 million. Other studies show that bird which characteristics may make individuals management actions have halved the cost of re- more likely to collide with aircraft. pairs to aircraft that are damaged by birds (e.g. It is also possible that due to a lack of pre- Solman 1973). vious near-fatal encounters, most birds do not Military versus civil aircrafts. Military air- perceive an aircraft as a threat or potential craft are usually more vulnerable to bird predator. Limited evidence suggests that the strikes than civil aircraft because they typically amount of air traf®c affects birds' evading abil- travel at high speeds at low altitudes (30 to 300 ities. The chance of bird strikes increases with m), where most birds ¯y. Approximately 54% the reduction of air traf®c on a runway (Burger of the bird strikes on military aircraft and 90% 1985). Birds probably get acclimatized to the of those to civil aircraft around the world occur lack of traf®c and become less vigilant. There- in or near to air®elds (e.g. during take off) fore, airport mangers must take speci®c action (Smith 1986, Neubauer 1990, Cleary et al. 1999). (e.g. disperse birds before resuming aircraft ac- However, those ®gures should be viewed with tivity) when a runway has been inactive for caution because bird strikes en route can go un- several hours. reported. Military aircraft are also vulnerable Recent design improvements might have at bombing ranges where pilots do not always made aircraft more vulnerable to bird colli- adequately detect approaching birds (Neu- sions. Due to public and economic pressure, bauer 1990). The number of reported bird quieter, larger, and faster aircraft have been de- strikes on military aircraft in the United States veloped. Faster and wider-bodied aircraft are increased steadily between 1974 and 1987. struck more often by birds than are the older, However, that could have been due to height- narrower-bodied jets (Burger 1983). For exam- ened pilot awareness of the need to report col- ple, birds strike 737 passenger jets less fre- lisions. Thus, bird±aircraft collisions are not quently than the larger 767 jets (Chilvers et al. July 2002] Perspectives in Ornithology 589 1997). With the wider bodied aircraft, birds son for these species differences is not clear, but have to ¯y twice as far to escape than they do young individuals are probably either less ca- for the older small-bodied aircraft.