H. Jeffrey Homan

Research Wildlife Biologist (retired) 

USDA-APHIS-Wildlife Services 

National Wildlife Research Center 

Fort Collins, Colorado

Ron J. Johnson 

Professor Emeritus

School of Agricultural, Forest 

 and Environmental Sciences

Clemson University

Clemson, South Carolina

James R. Thiele 

Wildlife Biologist

USDA-APHIS-Wildlife Services 

Lincoln, Nebraska

George M. Linz 

Research Wildlife Biologist (retired)

USDA-APHIS-Wildlife Services 

National Wildlife Research Center

Fort Collins, Colorado

Human-Wildlife Conflicts

European starlings (Sturnus vulgaris, 

Figure 1) are an invasive species in the 

United States. The first recorded release of 

the birds was in 1890 in New York City’s 

Central Park. Because starlings easily 

adapt to a variety of habitats, nest sites 

and food sources, the birds spread quickly 

across the country. Today, there are about 

150 million starlings in North America.

Conflicts between people and starlings 

occur mostly in agricultural settings. 

Conflicts can occur during winter in urban 

and suburban environments, especially in 

business districts.

Crops

Starlings damage apples, blueberries, 

cherries, figs, grapes, peaches, and 

strawberries. Besides causing direct losses 

from eating fruits, starlings peck and slash 

at fruits, reducing product quality and 

increasing the fruits’ susceptibility to 

diseases and crop pests (Figure 2).

Fruit damage begins in early May, with 

early damage done by aggregated family 

groups. Flock composition during May and 

June is often dominated by young-of-theyear. Later in the damage season, 

Wildlife Damage Management 

Technical Series

U.S. Department of Agriculture

Animal & Plant Health Inspection Service

Wildlife Services

September 2017 European Starlings

Figure 1. Female European starling in winter plumage.

Quick Links

Human-Wildlife Conflicts 1

Damage Identification 6

Management Methods 6

Economics 16 

Species Overview 16

Legal Status 21

Glossary & Key Words 22

Resources 23 

Appendices 25 
starlings segregate into flocks consisting almost entirely of 

either adults or juveniles.

In 2012, field damage surveys were conducted in cherry 

orchards and vineyards in Michigan, New York, Washington 

and Oregon. Bird damage to sweet cherries ranged from 3 

percent to 25 percent, whereas damage to grapes ranged 

from 4 percent to 10 percent. Because of their abundance 

and broad distribution in the U.S., starlings were major 

culprits in this damage.

That same year, fruit producers from the four states listed 

above, plus California, were surveyed. Results indicated 

that annual damage to wine grapes was more than $70 

million (Figure 3). Grape producers ranked starlings first 

among three major depredating bird species, which 

included American robins (Turdus migratorius) and wild 

turkeys (Meleagris gallopavo).

Other results from the 2012 survey of producers indicated 

$51 million in damages to sweet cherries and $33 million 

to blueberries. Total bird damage for the five types of fruit 

crops covered in the 2012 survey (blueberries, wine 

grapes, apples, sweet cherries and tart cherries) was 

estimated at $189 million. Starlings were ranked either 

first or second among the bird species believed 

responsible for damaging the five crop types in the survey.

In the U.S., starlings are not considered serious pests in 

cereal crops or oilseed crops. They pull sprouts of some 

grain crops, but damage appears to be minor and 

intermittent. Producers of sweet corn in several 

Midwestern states have complained about starling damage 

during the ripening period (Figure 4). Complaints have 

risen steadily over time, but the amount of starling damage 

to fields of sweet corn has not been documented.

Livestock

Starlings gather at concentrated animal feeding operations 

(CAFOs) during late fall and winter. Flocks are much larger 

than those encountered in late summer and are harder to 

disperse because of a lack of alternative foods. Starlings 

prefer facilities with open feeder systems which provide 

easy access to livestock rations (Figure 5).

Figure 3. Starlings entering a vineyard.

Page 2 WDM Technical Series—European Starlings

Figure 2. Bird damage to sweet cherries in Michigan.
A flock of 1,000 starlings using a CAFO for 60 days during 

winter will eat about 1.5 tons of cattle feed, representing a 

loss of $200 to $400 per 1,000 starlings. About 250,000 

starlings that were using a Midwestern feedlot increased 

the cost of feeding a ration of steam-flaked corn by $43 

per heifer over a 47-day period between mid-January and 

March. Costs in lost production (i.e., livestock weight 

gained per unit feed consumed) over this period was $1.00 

per animal.

The link between starlings and livestock health is 

beginning to be understood. Epidemiological evidence 

suggests that starlings are both biological vectors (e.g., 

fecal matter) and mechanical vectors (e.g., feet, beaks) of 

pathogens. Starlings can transmit or amplify several 

bacterial, fungal, parasitical and viral pathogens. Starlings 

carry Salmonella spp., several Escherichia coli serotypes, 

Campylobacter jejuni, Mycobacterium avium, 

Chalmydophilia psittaci, Flavivirus spp. (West Nile Virus), 

Avulavirus spp. (Newcastle’s disease) and transmissible 

gastroenteritis (a coronavirus) without showing any 

symptoms of illness. Pathogens survive in feed troughs, 

watering troughs and fecal deposits, some surviving for 

weeks or years. Transmission to livestock occurs through 

fecal–oral routes, mainly ingestion or licking among 

animals. 

Structures

In urban environments, the excreta from starling roosts 

fouls windows, sidewalks, city monuments, landscaping, 

facades and entryways. The degradation of site quality of 

downtown environments affects business ambience, public 

amenities and private property, and may deter commerce.

In addition to creating unsanitary conditions, large deposits 

of excreta can corrode metals, including motor vehicles 

(Figure 6) and support structures of buildings and bridges.

Maintenance costs associated with cleaning urban roost 

sites (Figure 7) are a burden to businesses and city 

governments. Contracts for a single cleaning of a large 

skyscraper’s windows are about $50,000. If an urban roost 

lasts for a couple of months, costs quickly mount because 

of multiple cleanings. A starling roost of about 35,000 

birds in a city center may cost a business $260,000 in 

cleanup and maintenance over a couple of years.

Lastly, urban and suburban starlings commonly use 

building exhaust vents as nest sites. Nests can clog vents 

and create unsafe venting conditions.

Page 3

Figure 4. Starling perched on sweet corn during a repellent study with 

captive birds.

U.S. Department of Agriculture

Figure 5. Starlings resting and feeding at a dairy farm.
Human Health and Safety

Disease

Shiga toxin-producing E. coli (STEC) and Salmonella spp. 

are two important foodborne pathogens in the U.S. that 

cause more than 1 million clinical illnesses each year. 

Direct medical costs resulting from infections of E. coli and 

Salmonella spp. are about $400 million per year. The total 

costs to public health from STEC and Salmonella spp. 

increases to $3 billion with the addition of indirect costs 

(e.g., premature death, loss of productivity).

Salmonella

At CAFOs, starlings shed Salmonella in their feces. The 

prevalence of shedding by starlings is relatively low, 

ranging from 1 percent to 3 percent. This seemingly low 

rate of prevalence, however, can result in a sizable number 

of infected starlings when thousands of birds are using a 

CAFO. Studies at cattle feedlots have shown significant 

statistical relationships between the number of starlings 

using a feedlot and the presence of Salmonella enterica in 

watering and feed troughs. Of the various items studied, 

including the onsite population size of starlings, cattle 

stocking rates, facility management, environmental 

variables and fecal shedding by cattle, onsite population 

size of starlings best explained S. enterica contamination. 

Whether starlings are the primary source of S. enterica 

contamination or just amplify its presence has yet to be 

determined. Preliminary research provides some statistical 

support for amplification. A reduction of starling 

populations at cattle feedlots with more than 10,000 birds 

led to the complete disappearance of S. enterica from feed 

troughs and to substantial declines in prevalence of S. 

enterica in water troughs. At feedlots where starling 

numbers were not managed, contamination levels of S. 

enterica in feed troughs and water troughs remained 

nearly the same. Despite these promising results, no 

difference in the prevalence of S. enterica in cattle feces 

was detected between sites with and without starling 

management. This finding suggests that additional factors, 

besides fecal contamination by starlings, help sustain S. 

enterica once it becomes established in a herd. Multiple 

biological, environmental and facility management factors 

(i.e., herd size and age, manure management and 

disposal, feed storage, access to bacterially-contaminated 

waters, season and influx of new cattle) could influence the 

frequency and duration of S. enterica in cattle feces. 

E. coli

Laboratory studies show that fecal shedding from starling 

to starling, starling to cattle, and cattle to starling can 

transfer the STEC pathotype, E. coli O157. Cattle to starling 

transmission occurs rapidly, taking less than a day. Field 

studies have provided circumstantial support for starlings 

Page 4

Figure 7. Starling roost located on a skyscraper.

WDM Technical Series—European Starlings

Figure 6. Vehicle parked near an urban starling roost.
being both vectors and reservoirs of E. coli O157. 

Investigations on the starling’s role as a vector of 

pathogens within and among CAFOs are ongoing. 

Histoplasma

Histoplasmosis is a non-communicable respiratory disease 

caused by inhaling spores of the soil fungus, Histoplasma 

capsulatum. The majority of cases occur in the central, 

southeastern and mid-Atlantic states. About 50,000 to 

200,000 cases occur annually, resulting in 800 human 

deaths. Most infections are asymptomatic and subclinical; 

between 50 percent and 80 percent of people who live in 

areas where H. capsulatum is common show antibody 

evidence of exposure, yet only 5 percent develop 

symptoms severe enough to be categorized as clinically 

sick. Symptoms include fever, cough, weakness, 

headaches and muscle aches. Histoplasmosis is hard to 

diagnose because it resembles influenza. Histoplasmosis 

has recently emerged as an important opportunistic 

infection (e.g., disseminated histoplasmosis) among 

individuals with compromised immune systems.

Soils enriched by nitrogen-laden bird excreta provide an 

excellent substrate for H. capsulatum. Most upland roosts 

have H. capsulatum, but the fungus is not exclusive to 

starling roosts, as any upland roost can have it. Excreta 

need to accumulate for more than 3 years before fungal 

spore densities reach levels high enough to affect human 

health. Bird droppings must dry out and then be re-wetted 

before spores can form. Spores cannot form under the 

highly acidic conditions created from freshly deposited 

excreta. Massive numbers of spores can be released if 

soils underneath a roost are disturbed during dry and 

windy conditions. Severe epidemics of histoplasmosis have 

occurred in association with the bulldozing of woodland 

roosts.

Although H. capsulatum is associated with soils, it can be 

found growing inside and around buildings. Thus, starling 

roosts at industrial sites, manufacturing facilities and 

abandoned buildings potentially contain the fungus. 

Commonly used roost sites inside of buildings include 

stairwells, window ledges, pillars, pipes and beams. 

Bats are biological carriers of H. capsulatum, and their 

presence at roosts located inside of buildings dramatically 

increases the likelihood of finding the fungus. Starlings are 

only mechanical carriers of H. capsulatum. Active roosting 

sites and fresh excretal deposits encountered on 

sidewalks, streets (Figure 8) and buildings in urban areas 

usually do not have H. capsulatum.

Airplane Hazards

Starlings can be hazardous to airplanes because they may 

roost in the wooded buffer zones that commonly surround 

airports. Roosts may even form within airport grounds in 

landscaped areas.

In 1960, a Lockheed L188 Electra (four-engine turboprop) 

ingested a flock of starlings on takeoff and crashed, 

resulting in 62 human fatalities and 9 injuries. This 

remains the worst aircraft incident in the U.S. involving a 

collision with birds. Post-crash analyses determined that 

design flaws in the turboprop engines made the engines 

highly susceptible to damage from bird strikes. Modern 

engines are more capable of withstanding ingestions of 

small birds like starlings.

Starlings were identified in 3,203 bird strikes to military 

and civilian aircraft in the U.S. between 1990 and 2013 

(Figure 9). 

U.S. Department of Agriculture Page 5

Figure 8. Starling fecal material from a roost above an alleyway in an 

urban center.
Total costs were estimated at $7 million. No human 

fatalities were recorded. Starlings represented only a 

fraction of the 145,124 bird strikes reported in the U.S. 

between 1990 and 2013; however, starling roosts remain a

substantial management challenge at airports during fall 

and winter.

Native Species

Starlings compete with native bird species for cavity 

nesting sites and may impact species such as eastern 

bluebirds (Sialia sialis), purple martins (Progne subis), 

wood ducks (Aix sponsa) and several species of 

woodpeckers. 

Nuisance Problems

Residents of cities and towns complain about the noise, 

smell and unsightliness of starling roosts. Most starling 

roosts in residential areas are temporary aggregations, 

provided that the roosts do not occur in dense stands of 

evergreens. If left alone, the roost may last a couple of 

weeks. Harassing starlings with auditory stimuli as they 

enter the roost can cause the roost to break up earlier. 

Temporary roosting sites in cities and towns often are used 

by several other bird species, including blackbirds, 

American robins, purple martins, and mourning doves 

(Zenaida macroura). 

Seeing large starling flocks nearby is often the first 

indicator that damage may be due to starlings. Starlings 

damage fruits, such as grapes or berries, by complete 

removal or partial removal of fruits. Damage to grapes and 

berries can be similar in appearance to damage caused by 

American robins, a species of comparable size. Large-sized 

fruits, such as apples or citrus, are damaged by pecking 

and slashing. Starling damage to sweet corn is not 

noticeably different from damage caused by blackbirds, 

with stripping of husks and damage often concentrated on 

the top of the ear. Damage to livestock rations is 

characterized by the removal of food items with highenergy content, including corn rations and fat 

supplements. In urban environments, large volumes of 

excreta or “whitewash” on buildings, windows and 

pedestrian walkways are indicative of starlings.

Combining multiple methods that affect auditory, gustatory 

and visual senses is an effective approach for managing 

pest birds, such as starlings. Starlings quickly habituate to 

visual deterrents (e.g., Mylar® tape, hawk kites) and audio 

deterrents (e.g., recorded distress calls). You can prolong 

and enhance the effectiveness of deterrents by frequently 

changing their locations and reinforcing them with other 

methods, such as pyrotechnics, propane cannons, falconry, 

and shooting. 

Netting is the most effective non-lethal method for 

preventing starling damage to ripening fruits, but the 

logistics of netting, along with its high initial investment 

($7,000 to $30,000 per acre, depending on the netting 

system), typically limits its use to small plots. Large 

vineyards that grow high-value grapes (e.g., Chardonnay, 

White Riesling and Cabernet Sauvignon) subject to severe 

bird damage may be economically justified in using netting 

(Figure 10). Where netting is cost-prohibitive, a 

combination of trapping, pyrotechnics and physical 

harassment may be effective. Trapping can be very 

effective early in the season because starlings, especially 

juveniles, are not trap wary. Later, pyrotechnics are more 

effective when adult-dominated flocks begin to forage.

Page 6 WDM Technical Series—European Starlings

Figure 9. A flock of European starlings in the path of a landing jet.

Management Methods

Damage Identification
Fruit damage begins as soon as fruits start to turn color, 

sometimes as early as June. Varieties of fruit that ripen 

earlier tend to receive more damage and need more 

protection because of lower availability of natural food 

sources early in the growing season.

Timing of damage strongly influences basic strategies of 

management. For example, non-lethal methods work better 

for protecting fruit crops than CAFOs because fruit damage 

usually occurs when there still is an abundance of natural 

foods, such as soil grubs. By contrast, starling damage at 

CAFOs occurs during late fall and winter, when natural 

foods are more scarce.

Minimum population thresholds or damage thresholds for 

initiating management actions depend on both the 

effectiveness of the methods being used and the value of 

the crops being defended. Management thresholds 

become much lower, of course, as crop values increase.

The avicide, DRC-1339 Concentrate, is effective for 

reducing damage at large CAFOs. A treatment with 

DRC-1339 can range from $800 to $5,000. If only feed 

losses are used to establish a minimum population 

threshold for treatment at a CAFO, a population of around 

10,000 starlings should be enough to warrant a 

management action. For example, 1,000 wintering 

starlings will eat approximately $200 to $400 of feed if 

present for 60 days. Successful DRC-1339 treatments will 

remove 70 percent to 100 percent of the targeted 

population. Maximum take from a single DRC-1339 

treatment rarely exceeds 20,000 birds. Thus, livestock 

facilities with severe infestations of starlings may require 

several treatments to cause a noticeable reduction in 

starling population levels. Minimum population and 

damage thresholds at orchards and vineyards are harder 

to estimate due to the varying effectiveness of 

management methods.

When considering the economic feasibility of a 

management method, a cost-benefit ratio of 1:2 or greater 

should be expected. For more information on estimating 

cost-benefit ratios, please see Appendix 2.

Habitat Modification

Remove or thin perch sites used by starlings for day and 

night roosts, including tree stands, dense vegetation (e.g., 

evergreens), and emergent vegetation growing in wetlands 

and low-lying areas. Woodlots used for roosting typically 

have dense canopies with most trees between 20 to 25 

years old. Thinning young stands by 30 percent to 50 

percent may disperse roosts or prevent roosting. Pruning 

side branches of roost trees discourages roosting, but 

avoid topping trees, which results in denser sidebranching. Removal of trees may also be necessary.

Aquatic herbicides are commercially available to thin 

dense stands of wetland emergents, such as cattails. In 

some regions, wetlands and dense thickets of bottomlands 

are highly preferred winter roosting sites. These sites may 

be located several miles from sites used for daily activities.

The importance of onsite management practices to reduce 

starling damage at CAFOs cannot be overstated. The 

primary goal is to limit the availability of food and water to 

starlings. Starlings forage the most during early mornings 

and late afternoons before going to roost. Feeding 

schedules that take these main foraging periods into 

account can minimize problems. When feeding livestock, 

use covered feeders or covered areas, such as sheds. 

Avoid placing feed on the ground, and clean up spilled 

grains. Cover or enclose exposed feed storage bunks. 

Timed automatic-release livestock feeders can help 

U.S. Department of Agriculture Page 7

Figure 10. Netting is effective for protecting high-value crops, such as wine 

grapes.
producers avoid times when starlings are likely to be 

foraging. For example, switch to afternoon or nighttime 

feeding schedules, if possible. Mix protein and fat 

supplements thoroughly into the feed.

Starlings bathe several times a day, so eliminate 

unnecessary pools of water; also, lower water levels in 

troughs to prevent starlings from drinking and bathing.

Use feed with forms/pellets greater than 0.5-inch in 

diameter. These are difficult for starlings to swallow. 

Starlings will not eat 0.75-inch x 3-inch extruded pellets. 

Minimize use of 3/16 -inch diameter pellets because 

starlings can consume these six times faster than other 

forms, such as granular meal. 

Exclusion

If installed correctly, netting can be highly effective at 

excluding starlings. Nylon or plastic netting is used to 

exclude starlings from ledges of multi-storied buildings, but 

rough edges of building facades can tear netting, making it 

hard to maintain. Moreover, birds trapped behind the 

netting may die and decay. Cover undersides of roof 

beams with netting to prevent starlings from entering and 

using barns, sheds and other structures. When possible, 

use netting inside of CAFO buildings to prevent access to 

rafters, struts and other perching sites. 

Netting is cost-effective for protecting vineyards where bird 

damage is high. If properly maintained, netting can last for 

5 or more years. For wine grapes harvested only once a 

season, tractor-mounted rollers can facilitate the 

placement and removal of netting over fairly large areas. 

The cost of labor, netting and construction of an 

application-removal system for large-area netting is about 

$400 per acre per year, assuming a 10-year lifespan. Highvalued wine grapes (i.e., $8,000 per acre for some 

varieties) may justify the netting of large areas. A producer 

of high-valued grapes seeking a management cost-benefit 

ratio of 1:3 would be justified in using netting if damage 

levels were about 15 percent. However, the purchase cost 

of netting is high, and netting is subject to wear and tear. 

Grape varieties that continue to grow after ripening may 

tear nets and hamper net removal.

Table grapes are harvested by hand several times a year. 

Use a frame to hold netting above the vines so it does not 

interfere with frequent harvests. The total area to be 

netted may be too large to be practical. If so, protect 

varieties that receive the most damage (e.g., fruits of 

small, dark, sweet grapes), especially fruits that ripen early 

or are grown near habitat edges. Starlings, however, are 

not a dedicated edge species and may be found in the 

center of orchards and vineyards. 

Door strips made of either heavy plastic or rubber can 

exclude starlings from barns and other outbuildings. Use 

10-inch wide door strips with 2-inch gaps to block 

entryways used by people, machinery or livestock. Door 

strips are useful for protecting feed bunks inside buildings 

if the strips are mounted on a superstructure. Although 

netting blocks starling access through entryways, 

machinery or livestock can easily tear it.

Place 45°-angle coverings of wood, metal or Plexiglas®

over ledges to prevent starlings from perching, nesting or 

roosting. Metal protectors or porcupine wires are available 

to prevent roosting on ledges or roof beams. 

Starlings compete with other bird species for cavity nest 

sites. Proper nest box construction reduces starling 

occupation. For eastern bluebirds, use a round 1 1⁄2-inch 

opening or a rectangular slot cut 4 inches wide by 1 1⁄8 

inches high. Mountain bluebirds (Sialia currucoides) and 

western bluebirds (S. mexicana) are larger and require a 

1 -inch opening and a larger inner chamber of at least 

5 x 5 inches. Most starlings cannot enter a 1 -inch 

diameter hole. 

Starlings will evict wood ducks, screech owls (Megascops

spp.) and other cavity nesters from nest boxes that must 

have large openings. Starlings may use boxes as second 

occupants. Routine maintenance is necessary to keep 

starlings from nest boxes with large-diameter openings. If 

starlings are removed early in the reproductive season 

(April and May), attempts to re-nest in the same box are 

reduced. Remove starling nests and destroy their contents, 

including eggs and young. Starlings are persistent, and the 

removal of nests and contents may need to be done 

repeatedly. Starlings often avoid using horizontal, artificial 

nesting cavities constructed of PVC (polyvinyl chloride) pipe 

Page 8 WDM Technical Series—European Starlings

16

9

16

9
Auditory and Visual

Propane exploders are the most popular frightening device 

because they are relatively inexpensive and easy to use. 

Propane exploders with automatic timers that turn the 

exploders on and off each day are useful for reducing 

habituation, coordinating timing of the explosions with 

periods of heavy foraging, and preventing noise complaints 

from neighbors. Use at least one exploder for every 5 to 10 

acres in need of protection. Elevate exploders if vegetation 

canopy is tall enough to block the sound. Use a barrel, 

stand, or truck bed and move it often to slow habituation. 

Varying the time between explosions also helps to delay 

habituation.

Pyrotechnics are more efficient than propane exploders 

when larger, more inaccessible areas need protection. 

Pyrotechnics can be launched from pistols or shotguns and 

travel for nearly 200 yards before exploding, thus bringing 

the stimulus directly to the foraging site. Pyrotechnics are 

more labor-intensive than propane cannons because they 

require an operator. They can be dangerous if misused or 

mishandled.

Recordings of starling distress calls and alarm calls work 

best when accompanied by visual stimuli. Starlings (as do 

most birds) will investigate the source of calls. If starlings 

cannot associate a call with a visual stimulus befitting their 

expectations, they quickly learn to ignore the call. Thus, 

integrating the use of raptor decoys and kites can enhance 

the effectiveness of calls (Figure 11). Make the scenario 

even more realistic by including both a raptor decoy and 

model of its prey within the raptor’s clutches. Achieving 

adequate broadcasting coverage often requires expensive 

electronic systems; consider their cost when defending a 

large area against starlings. Lastly, ultrasonic sounds 

(above 20 kHz) are not effective in frightening starlings 

because it is beyond their range of hearing.

Commonly used visual frightening devices include Mylar 

tape, hawk kites, eye-spot balloons, pop-up scarecrows 

and inflatable tubes. These devices are inexpensive and 

easy to use. However, tests of their effectiveness have 

produced mixed or null results. Mylar tape appeared to 

U.S. Department of Agriculture Page 9

or sheet metal pipe. For wood ducks, camouflage or darken 

the pipe to better fit into the environment. Recommended 

dimensions for wood ducks are a 24-inch length pipe with a 

12-inch diameter. Cap one end and place the entry at the 

other end. The entry should be semicircular, consisting of a 

cut 4 inches high by 11 inches wide. Similarly, small artificial 

nest cavities made of 3 3⁄4-inch diameter PVC pipe cut 10 7⁄8-

inches long with one end capped and an entry hole less than 

or equal to 2 inches in diameter on the other end can deter 

starlings while remaining usable by smaller, preferred bird 

species, such as swallows and bluebirds. 

Frightening Devices

The effectiveness of frightening devices is often dependent 

upon the operator’s persistence and skill, the attractiveness 

and availability of the crops being eaten by birds, and the 

availability of alternative foods. Starlings tend to quickly 

adjust or habituate to frightening devices, especially if 

devices remain in the same location for extended periods. A 

combination of several frightening devices working together 

on visual and auditory senses is more effective than a single 

device. Vary the location, intensity and types of scare devices 

to increase their effectiveness. Use frightening devices in 

early morning and late afternoon, when birds are most 

actively feeding. Begin using visual and auditory devices 

before starlings start forming strong attachments to the site.

Although it may take only a few weeks for starlings to 

habituate to frightening devices, this may be enough time to 

protect a ripening crop. Effectiveness of frightening devices 

ultimately depends on having alternative food sources 

available for starlings to feed on. During winter, when food is 

more limited, the effect of frightening devices is short-lived.

Many frightening devices are available, including scarecrows, 

animated scarecrows, recorded calls, propane exploders, 

battery-operated alarms, pyrotechnics (e.g., bangers, 

shellcrackers, and screamers), a chemical frightening agent, 

lights (for roosting sites at night) and Mylar tape.
deter red-winged blackbirds from feeding in ripening grain 

fields, but not starlings from feeding on ripening 

blueberries. Combining a visual stimulus, such as a rapidly 

inflating device (e.g., inflatable tubes, scarecrows) with the 

auditory stimulus of a propane cannon may be more 

effective.

Scanning a roosting site with green lasers, which penetrate 

semi-darkness better than other colors, may help disperse 

roosts of urban starlings. The effectiveness of the laser is 

enhanced if accompanied by pyrotechnics. Lasers are 

ineffective at dispersing birds roosting in dense vegetation.

Chemical Frightening Agent

Avitrol® (active ingredient 4-aminopyridine) products are 

restricted use pesticides available in several bait 

formulations for use as chemical frightening agents. Only 

certified applicators or those under their direct supervision 

can purchase or use Avitrol products, and only for those 

uses allowed on the product’s label. 

Avitrol baits contains a small number of treated grains or 

pellets mixed with many untreated grains or pellets. Birds 

that eat treated bait behave erratically and give alarm cries 

that can frighten other birds. Birds that eat treated grains 

or pellets die. Avitrol products are available for controlling 

starlings at feedlots and staging areas. Non-target birds, 

such as hawks and owls, may die from eating sick or dead 

birds poisoned with Avitrol. Pick up and bury or incinerate 

any dead starlings at a treated site.

Several Avitrol bait formulations are labeled for starling 

management at CAFOs. Most are corn-based formulations. 

The formulation most appropriate for a given situation 

varies, particularly if large numbers of blackbirds are 

associated with starlings. The Double Strength Corn Chops 

formulation is best for mixed flocks of starlings and 

blackbirds. Starlings can develop bait shyness (bait 

rejection) to Avitrol baits. Prebaiting for several days with 

untreated pellets is necessary for effective bait 

consumption. If starling problems persist, change bait 

locations to reduce bait shyness. Additional prebaiting may 

be necessary.

During the winter, the use of frightening agents and 

devices at CAFOs is generally not effective. Moreover, if the 

spread of disease is a concern, frightening devices may 

disperse disease-carrying starlings to other nearby 

facilities.

Repellents

Soft, sticky perching repellents consisting of nontoxic 

polybutenes prevent starlings from roosting on sites such 

as ledges, roof beams or signage. First, put masking tape 

on the surface needing protection, then apply polybutenes. 

The tape makes it easier to remove the polybutenes and 

allows for application on porous surfaces. Over time, 

polybutenes lose their effectiveness and may have to be 

reapplied, if label instructions allow repeated treatments. 

Label instructions must be followed for any pesticide 

product containing polybutene. Labor-costs and longevity 

are issues to consider when using polybutene products.

Several products containing tart or spicy hot ingredients 

are commercially available and sold as bird repellents. The 

same ingredients also may be marketed as insect and 

mammal repellents. Most ingredients used in these 

products are food-grade and typically have no U.S. Food 

and Drug Administration (FDA) residue tolerance levels 

associated with their use. However, some ingredients 

impart temporary off flavors to the crop following 

treatment. That said, taste perceptions of birds are far 

different from those of mammals. For example, capsicum, 

Page 10 WDM Technical Series—European Starlings

Figure 11. A kite designed to mimic a hawk flies above an orchard of sweet 

cherries.
Aerial spraying of rice at 0.7 pounds of MA per acre 

produced MA residues on rice ranging from 1 ppm to 4 

ppm. 

The majority of field data on MA applications to fruits has 

shown either no repellency effect or very short-term 

effects. More effective formulations or techniques of 

application are needed to increase MA efficacy. 

Although initial studies indicated that MA has potential as 

an avian feeding repellent on livestock feeds, it rarely has 

been used in this manner. MA is not cost effective when 

livestock are fed several times a day. Additionally, feed 

prices are relatively low compared to the price of MA.

Another repellent is 9,10 anthraquinone (AQ). AQ is a 

secondary repellent meaning that, unlike sensory 

repellents, it must be eaten. Birds that ingest AQ suffer 

digestive discomfort, which they associate with recently 

eaten foods. AQ is an effective seed treatment on corn, 

sunflower and rice. AQ is approved under Section 24(c) of 

the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act 

(FIFRA) for use in 26 states as a seed treatment on corn. 

Pesticide residue tolerances must still be established for 

AQ to be used on food crops. 

Shooting

Shooting is generally not an effective damage 

management technique for starlings, especially when 

protecting large areas. Instead, shooting can be used for 

short-term damage problems or as a reinforcement for 

other methods, such as frightening devices. Shooting is 

labor intensive and requires diligence and consistency. 

Legally, roosts on public lands cannot be disturbed. 

Starlings, especially during winter, are active in relatively 

confined areas where pursuit and harassment with 

firearms become more feasible than in large field crops or 

orchards. In addition, starlings have strong site fidelity 

during fall and winter making them more susceptible to 

repeated harassment, if a daily program is initiated. 

U.S. Department of Agriculture Page 11

the chemical responsible for the heat in peppers, is a taste 

irritant in mammals at 1,000 parts per million (ppm). In 

birds, capsicum is not an irritant, even at very high 

concentrations. 

Several commercial feeding repellents contain the 

compound methyl anthranilate (MA). The FDA has 

designated MA as ‘generally recognized as safe’ (GRAS). 

MA is used as a flavoring or additive in many foods, drinks 

and fragrances used by people. It is exempted from FDA 

food tolerance requirements. 

Several MA formulations are available, with MA 

concentrations ranging from 20 percent to 50 percent. In 

birds, MA acts as a chemosensory repellent that irritates 

pain receptors associated with a bird’s ability to taste and 

smell. Methyl anthranilate is registered for use on 

numerous fruit and grain crops.

At relatively high concentrations (5,000 ppm [0.5%] to 

10,000 ppm [1%]), MA is a reliable sensory repellent. 

However, MA requires multiple applications because it 1) 

rapidly degrades in the environment, 2) dissolves in the 

rain, and 3) requires strong concentrations to cause 

irritation in starlings. Costs rise quickly with multiple 

applications. High-valued crops, such as cherries, 

blueberries, grapes, and sweet corn, may be good 

candidates for MA.

An “irritation threshold” for a bird repellent is operationally 

defined as the concentration necessary to elicit frequent 

bill wiping, vomiting, head shaking, disheveled feathers, 

and quick-preening. In aerosol form, MA stimulates 

adverse reactions in starlings at 8,000 ppm, whereas 

irritation thresholds in MA solutions presented as drinking 

water range from 5,000 to 10,000 ppm. Starlings avoid 

foods at MA concentrations of 5,000 ppm or higher.

Current application techniques do not deliver MA at 

threshold concentrations. Reaching 0.5 percent MA 

coverage is difficult, especially on fruits or grains 

surrounded by leafy cover. Residue analysis of MA applied 

by a backpack sprayer to blueberries showed initial 

residues of 115 ppm (0.01%) immediately following 

application at a rate of 15.2 pounds of MA per acre. 

Residues dropped to 18 ppm 24 hours after treatment. 
Before starting a shooting program, observe the behavior 

of arriving flocks, noting their arrival and departure times, 

locations of staging sites and loafing sites, and sites used 

for foraging, drinking and bathing. 

Shooting patrols should begin about 30 minutes after the 

first flocks arrive. Shotguns are the preferred firearm. 

Continue harassing the birds for about an hour, keeping 

the birds restless and unable to forage. Resume 

harassment about 2 hours before sunset. Noise from the 

shotgun will be enough to move and disturb the birds, but 

shooting inside of lethal range serves as reinforcement. If 

the roost site is known and is only a few acres in size, 

harass the roost beginning about 30 minutes before 

sunset. Continue harassment by shotgun daily for about a 

week, then judge the results. If damage does not decline, 

other methods should be used. Shooters are advised to 

take a firearms safety course. 

Toxicants

Starlings are highly sensitive to the avicide, DRC-1339 

(3-chloro-4-methylaniline hydrochloride). Less than 0.4 mg 

of DRC-1339 will kill 50 percent of adult starlings (i.e., an 

LD50 [median lethal dose] value of approximately 4 mg per 

kg body weight [bw]). DRC-1339 is a slow-acting toxicant, 

and unless multiple doses have been eaten over a short 

period of time, only a few dead starlings will be found at or 

near a treated site. First symptoms of poisoning are thirst 

and hypothermia, which can occur within a few hours of 

eating treated baits. Poisoned starlings may attempt to 

return early to roost sites or seek cover in dense vegetation 

along the way. Affected starlings become more lethargic 

and eventually comatose. Death occurs in 1 to 3 days, 

likely caused by blood poisoning from kidney malfunction.

The risk of DRC-1339 to non-target species is limited by 

the selection of bait substrates, bait sizes, treatment 

dilutions and baiting sites. For example, the size and 

composition of pellet baits can prevent consumption by 

nontarget species. Moreover, many nontarget species 

(such as diurnal raptors) are not particularly sensitive to 

DRC-1339 with LD50s ranging from 100 to 500 mg/kg bw. 

Compound DRC-1339 Concentrate products are for use 

only by U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Wildlife 

Services (WS) employees or those under their direct 

supervision. These restricted use products consisting of a 

97 percent active ingredient powder are mixed by the 

applicator with one of several bait substrates, including 

cracked corn, rolled corn, distiller’s grain, milo, rolled milo, 

poultry pellets, raisins and French fries. Baits not listed on 

the product’s label need Section 24(c) exemptions, which 

require approvals by state regulatory agencies. 

Once prepared, DRC-1339-treated grain bait and pellet 

bait should be used within 7 days, even when the bait is 

stored properly. Raisin and French fry baits should be used 

within 24 hours of mixing. 

Prebaiting

Prebaiting is a necessary and important step before using 

Compound DRC-1339 Concentrate products. Prebaiting 

may take a week or longer to attract birds to a baiting site. 

Prebaiting accomplishes several purposes: 1) familiarizes 

starlings to the bait substrate; 2) allows for a pretreatment 

assessment of non-target risks; 3) allows for assessment 

of how much bait to apply when treatment begins; 4) 

increases the rate at which starlings will eat treated baits 

once treatment begins; and 5) lures starlings away from 

their usual feeding areas onsite, which may not be suitable 

for DRC-1339 use.

The prebait should be the same or very similar to the bait 

used when applying the DRC-1339 treatment. Although 

cracked corn works as a bait for starlings, poultry pellets 

are more attractive, particularly those enhanced with 

animal fat. You can reduce the number of prebaiting days 

by either mixing the prebait with foods that starlings are 

already eating or by using a bait that is already onsite, such 

as distiller’s grain.

When managing smaller populations of starlings, prebait 

can be placed in containers such as shallow trays, feeder 

pans and lids, makeshift troughs, and farm wagons. 

Containers can be easily moved, if needed. Moreover, they 

allow for faster cleanup of unused bait, and they can be 

covered at night and during rain events.

DRC-1339 treated bait cannot be placed in areas used by 

or accessible to livestock and poultry, including feed 

Page 12 WDM Technical Series—European Starlings
Starlings may forage at and use sites that are miles away 

from their roost sites, even when those roosts are located 

at CAFOs. Starlings depart from roost sites early in the 

morning, often not returning until late afternoon. Thus, 

baiting in the early afternoon may sometimes be 

worthwhile at CAFOs.

The amount of bait eaten on treatment days may be lower 

than that on previous prebaiting days. In some cases, only 

half of the bait is eaten. The early onset of symptoms from 

DRC-1339 at the baiting site may slow down the feeding 

rate, in addition to scaring away non-poisoned birds. The 

presence of sickened starlings near the bait site may 

indicate that the dilution is too strong. This can happen 

during cold periods, when birds are eating more 

aggressively. Changing the dilution rate to 1:20 or 1:30 

may increase the amount of take. A computer program is 

available to WS personnel to help estimate the number of 

starlings killed. 

Often the location of roost sites may not be known. 

Starlings that spend their day in rural areas sometimes 

roost in cities and towns. This can result in people 

encountering sick, dying and dead birds around roost sites 

and along flight lines to the roost sites. Clean up carcasses 

around known roost sites and dispose by burial or 

incineration, depending on State or local regulations. To 

prevent public alarm, notify neighbors, local authorities 

(e.g., county sheriff, county health departments), and state 

and federal resource agencies of baiting efforts. Make it 

known that sick and dead starlings may be found over a 

wide area, and provide guidance on the safe handling and 

removal of carcasses. Once ingested, DRC-1339 is 

metabolized quickly and most mammalian species 

(including canines, but not felines) are fairly resistant to 

DRC-1339. Thus, secondary hazards from scavenging are 

likely very low.

A successful DRC-1339 baiting operation can remove 

nearly all starlings from a treated facility provided that the 

population is not excessively large (e.g., over 25,000). 

Unsuccessful or apparently unsuccessful DRC-1339 

baiting attempts may result from underestimating the 

initial bird population, bait aversion, degradation of DRCU.S. Department of Agriculture Page 13

bunks, active pens and coops, and feed storage areas. 

Baiting sites in CAFO alleyways should be to the sides or in 

the center of traffic lanes to prevent the crushing and 

fragmenting of baits. Commonly used prebaiting sites 

include unused pens and unused feed bunks, alleyways 

between feed bunks, and open areas near the birds’ 

daytime loafing sites. 

Baiting

Once starlings consistently use a prebaiting site and eat 

nearly all of the untreated bait being offered daily, use of 

DRC-1339 treated bait can begin. 

On the day that DRC-1339 bait is applied, remove all bait 

leftover from the prebaiting period. Most starlings will feed 

heavily at bait sites in the morning after the daily care and 

feeding of livestock has subsided. DRC-1339 baiting is 

most effective during cold and clear days, especially when 

snow cover is present and the ground is frozen.

If winter storms are predicted, wait until the storms have 

passed before starting a DRC-1339 treatment. Treated 

baits can be placed on frozen ground or on top of snow, if 

no melting is occurring. Do not apply treated baits to wet or 

moist ground.

One pound of pelleted bait using a 1:5 dilution of 

Compound DRC-1339 Concentrate products will kill about 

100 to 200 starlings. 

In addition to CAFOs, Compound DRC-1339 Concentrate 

products can be used for baiting at roost sites and 

industrial sites, such as grain processing facilities, grain 

terminals, and food processing plants. The prebaiting and 

treatment protocols are similar to those used at CAFOs and 

include: 1) observing bird behavior, 2) selecting a 

prebaiting site, 3) prebaiting, 4) assessing non-target risks, 

5) estimating the amount of prebait taken daily, 6) applying 

treatment, and 7) cleaning up bait and carcasses. 

Starlings often forage on the ground near staging 

(gathering) areas. These areas may be effective baiting 

locations. In urban habitats, building rooftops are 

sometimes used as prebaiting sites. 
1339, clumping of treated baits in the mix, or a high 

population turnover. High population turnover should be 

rare, unless other CAFOs harboring large populations of 

starlings are within a few miles. To prevent rapid 

repopulation of a treated facility, all other starling-infested 

sites within a couple of miles of a DRC-1339 treated site 

should receive treatments at approximately the same time.

Trapping

Cage Traps

Trapping starlings is time consuming and success varies 

with the time of year, population size and amount of area 

in need of protection. Trapping with cage (decoy) traps at 

feedlots and dairies is not cost-effective due to the 

comparatively low economic value of livestock feed and 

relatively large numbers of starlings. Trapping starlings at 

vineyards, fruit orchards and berry farms can be cost 

effective, especially when flocks of unwary and naïve 

juveniles are involved.

Cage traps (Figure 12) for starlings should be at least 5 to 

6 feet tall to allow the operator ease-of-entry and freedom 

of movement inside the trap. A convenient frame size is 6 

feet x 8 feet, covered with wire 1-inch wide x 2-inches high. 

Coated wire will cause fewer trap injuries. Traps can be 

constructed in modular segments and expanded in width 

and length to increase effectiveness. A small (e.g., 2- x 2- x 

3-foot) gathering cage with a sliding door attached to an 

opening in the trap’s upper corner can be used to collect 

birds. 

Transfer captured birds to a cardboard box or canvascovered cage and euthanize with carbon dioxide gas or by 

cervical dislocation. Examine all dead birds for bands and 

report any bands found to the U.S. Geological Survey. 

Prebaiting the trap will speed up the trapping process. To 

do this, place the trap in an area frequently used by 

starlings, leaving the top and door of the trap open. Bait 

both inside and around the trap with attractive foods, such 

as fruits, raisins, mealworms or pellets with a high fat 

content. Provide perches and shallow pans with water to 

allow for drinking and bathing. Once starlings are using the 

trap, close it and place bait at the top of the trap near the 

point of entry and inside the trap directly below the entry. 

Starlings are not particularly wary of traps, and within a few 

days should begin entering the trap. Rebait the top and 

sides of the trap as needed. For smaller traps, keep about 

six birds as live decoys and euthanize the rest. Increase 

the number of decoys for larger traps. If not euthanizing 

the birds, transport and release them more than 20 miles 

away. A well-maintained decoy trap can capture up to 100 

starlings a day, depending on trap size, location, time of 

year and target population size. Release all captured nontarget birds at the capture site.

Birds in decoy traps must daily be given fresh food (e.g., 

cat kibbles) and water for drinking and bathing. Provide 

sheltered perches that protect the birds from sun, wind 

and precipitation. Replace decoy birds with newly caught 

birds every few days. Decoy traps have successfully 

removed starlings from sites where birds were damaging 

blueberries, figs, grapes, plums, peaches, apples and 

cherries. Australian crow traps, with slot sizes adjusted for 

starlings, are also commonly used. Basket-style cage traps 

(Figure 13) may be more effective for capturing starlings 

than slot-style traps. 

Page 14 WDM Technical Series—European Starlings

Figure 12. Cage trap used to capture starlings.
SLS destroys the insulating properties of feathers, causing 

hypothermia. Wetted birds die as soon as 30 minutes after 

spraying with SLS. Air temperatures must be less than 

41°F. SLS is classified as ‘moderately toxic’ to some 

species of aquatic invertebrates, and may harm plants, 

thus SLS is for use only on upland roosts and cannot be 

sprayed over bodies of water or in areas of direct runoff. 

SLS can damage ornamental plantings and affect plant 

growth. Before using SLS, the roosts must be observed for 

non-target species. Spraying is not allowed if non-target 

species are using the roost. Several field trials with SLS 

were conducted in southeastern Missouri between 2005 

and 2007 using ground-based sprayer systems. The 

systems consisted of 30-foot tower(s) with either 1 or 4 

sprinkler heads, each capable of covering a 2,000-square 

foot area (i.e., 50-foot diameter circle). A pump delivered 

water at 6 gallons per minute per sprinkler head. Up to 

12,000 starlings and 3,000 blackbirds were killed at a 

50,000-bird roost during a single SLS spray using 4 

sprinkler heads. The system delivered 21 gallons of SLS 

(Stepanol®, Stepan Co, Northfield, IL), along with 2,100 

gallons of water over a 1.5 hour period. Poor results were 

obtained in 3 of 8 roost sprays using SLS and were 

attributed to low water quality and pump malfunction.

Falconers and their birds of prey may be used to harass 

starlings from crops. It is labor intensive and expensive, 

and may cost more than $500 per day. Most falconers 

prefer to use their birds in fairly open habitats, where 

chances of injuries to the falcons are low. Blueberries and 

other types of high-value fruits with shrubby habits are 

more fitted to falconry than tree fruits. Birds are 

accustomed to seeing birds of prey during their daily lives, 

and the effect of falconry may be short-term. Installing 

falcon nest boxes at orchards and vineyards, especially for 

the American kestrel (Falco sparverius), provides an 

inexpensive alternative to falconry (Figure 14). 

Handling

No special precautions are needed when handling 

starlings. Use latex gloves and wash hands with sanitizer 

after handling.

U.S. Department of Agriculture Page 15

Nest-Box Trap

Starlings frequently use nest boxes and nest-box traps may 

be effective at reducing small populations that cause 

localized damage. A repeating nest-box trap allows multiple 

daily captures by funneling captives through a PVC pipe 

into a holding pen located on the ground. 

Check nest-box traps at least twice a day and release nontarget birds immediately. These traps are successful only 

during the nesting season which typically begins in late 

February and continues through June.

Larger nest boxes (16 inches x 8 inches X 8 inches) are 

more attractive to starlings. The entry hole should be 2 

inches in diameter. Place the nest-box trap on a pole in an 

open location or against the side of a building. Traps 

should be placed at least 10 feet above the ground.

Other Methods

Sodium lauryl sulfate (SLS) is a surfactant used for 

managing roosts of pest birds, including blackbirds and 

starlings. It is exempted from FIFRA registration 

requirements because SLS is classified as a minimum-risk 

pesticide under Section 25(b). States can either accept the 

federal exemption or require state registration of SLS, so 

check with the appropriate state regulatory agency before 

using SLS. 

Figure 13. Basket-style cage trap used to capture starlings.
Euthanasia

Cervical dislocation with needle-nose pliers can be used for 

small numbers of birds. For large numbers, use a sealed 

container and carbon dioxide. Death from asphyxiation 

occurs within 5 minutes once the container fills with gas.

Disposal

Often burial is sufficient, but check your local and state 

regulations regarding disposal of carcasses.

Starling damage reported to the USDA’s Wildlife Services 

program averages less than $2 million per year, but this is 

a fraction of all starling damage. Agricultural damage alone 

is estimated currently at $1 billion per year. Other damage, 

such as costs for cleaning and maintaining city centers 

near roosts, veterinary care and loss of production at 

CAFOs, and public health care, are unknown. A complete 

inventory of all economic damage likely would show that 

the starling is the most economically harmful bird species 

in the United States. 

Economic impacts of starlings on livestock herd health 

probably are substantial. A survey of dairy producers in 

Pennsylvania in 2009 suggested that veterinary costs at 

dairies with starling flocks numbering between 1,000 and 

10,000 birds were 38 percent higher ($91 per cow per 

year) than at dairies without starlings ($66).

Even if starlings play only a minor role in the transmission 

and amplification of pathogens between animals and 

among CAFOs, they would still have a major economic 

impact because of the enormity of industry-wide costs of 

herd diseases. For example, annual costs in the U.S. from 

gastrointestinal diseases in livestock caused by E. coli spp. 

(e.g., scours) and M. avium (Johne’s disease) were $600 

million. The average cost of an outbreak of Salmonella

among dairy cattle is $4,000 per farm per incident. 

Because salmonellosis is a far more common affliction in 

livestock than either E. coli or M. avium, annual costs from 

this disease likely exceed the $600 million yearly loss from 

scours and Johne’s disease. 

Not all studies have shown a correlation between starlings 

and livestock disease or production. In two years of testing 

at Western Kentucky University, neither pigs nor cattle 

were adversely affected by long-term exposure to livestock 

feed which was heavily contaminated with starling excreta. 

No significant differences in weight gain or feed efficiency 

(weight gain:feed offered) were detected between groups 

provided contaminated feed and clean feed. In addition, 

there were no observed differences in feed rejection rates 

or incidences of disease.

Identification

European starlings are in the Sturnidae family. During 

winter, starlings often associate with flocks of blackbirds 

(FamiIy Icteridae) and sometimes are misidentified as 

blackbirds. Starlings are not taxonomically related to 

blackbirds.

Starlings are powerful fliers with triangular-shaped wings. 

Top flight speeds may reach 50 miles per hour. Unlike 

blackbirds, undulations between wing beats are typically 

small, which aides in identification at a distance. Starlings 

sometimes glide in circular patterns multiple times before 

landing.

Page 16 WDM Technical Series—European Starlings

Figure 14. A young American kestrel (Falco sparverius) looks out from 

a nest box on the edge of a sweet cherry orchard.

Economics

Species Overview
introductions occurred in Oregon and New York. The only 

successful introduction was in New York City in the late 

1890s, when 16 pairs survived initial release and 

reproduced. By 1942, starlings were observed on the West 

Coast. They now inhabit all of North America (Figure 16). 

Their range extends southward to the Bahamas, Central 

America, Yucatan Peninsula, Puerto Rico, Jamaica and 

Cuba. There are no subspecies in North America. Genetic 

analysis indicates that all starlings in North America 

descended from the New York City introduction.

Voice and Sounds

Male territorial song consists of an underlying liquid gurgle 

lasting for about a minute. At various points in the song, 

the gurgling is interrupted by short ascending or 

descending whistles. Females likewise sing, but more so in 

the fall.

Their call repertoire consists of about 10 calls used for 

indicating their whereabouts, alarm, anxiety, distress and 

aggression. Calls include chattering, trills, guttural rolls, 

clicks and screeches.

Starlings are good mimics and imitate many sounds from 

their environment, including bird calls and traffic sounds. 

With training, a starling can imitate the human voice.

U.S. Department of Agriculture Page 17

Physical Description

Starlings are glossy, dark-colored birds (Figure 15). 

Females are duller and less glossy than males. Juveniles 

are tan until they molt in early fall, after which they 

resemble adults. During winter, body feathers have white 

speckled tips that wear away by summer. Starting in late 

winter, iridescent hues of green and purple become 

prominent in males on feathers of the head and neck; 

feathers on the throats of males are narrow and long 

compared to females. Mandibles are narrow and longish 

(3⁄4 inch). Both sexes have bright yellow mandibles 

beginning from late December through June. Mandibles 

become dark after June. In the yellow-mandible phase, the 

lower mandible of females may have a pale pink spot at 

the base; in males, the spot is pale blue. A light-colored eye 

ring may surround the iris of adult females. Adult males 

have uniformly brown-colored eyes with no eye ring.

Starlings are compact birds with a rounded body and short 

tail. Overall length is 8 inches. Average weight is 3 ounces, 

with females 10 percent to 20 percent smaller than males.

Range

Starlings are native to Europe, southwest Asia and 

northern Africa. Starlings were introduced repeatedly in the 

New World from the mid to late 19th century. Documented 

Figure 15. Male European starling. Figure 16. Starling wintering areas in the United States based on the 

National Audubon Society’s Christmas Bird Count.
Reproduction

Starlings are monogamous with annual pair bonds lasting 

throughout the reproductive period. Sexual maturity occurs 

at 1 year, but first-year birds may fail in their attempts to 

establish reproductive territories because of competition 

from older, more experienced birds.

Depending on latitude, the reproductive period lasts from 

late March through early July. Clutch size is 4 to 7 eggs, 

with an average of 5 eggs. The incubation period lasts 

approximately 13 days. Females incubate the eggs, but 

males sometimes guard the eggs during the female’s 

absence. Both parents feed the young, making up to 20 

trips per hour. Nestlings begin to thermoregulate 13 days 

after hatching and will fledge about 8 days later. South of 

48° N, two clutches are often attempted, with a second 

attempt initiated by 60 percent of females. Production 

from first nesting attempts accounts for about 80 percent 

of yearly production. The percentage of nests that fledge at 

least one bird ranges from 48 percent to 79 percent. Once 

established on a successful breeding territory, one or both 

pair members may return year after year. Offspring will 

disperse widely to find new breeding territories.

Nesting

Starlings prefer to use natural cavities, woodpecker 

cavities and birdhouses. They use nooks and crannies of 

various human-made structures, including vents, rafters, 

soffits, lampposts and signage bracing. Territoriality is 

confined to the immediate area of the nesting site.

Both parents build the nest, which is composed of a 

mixture of long grasses and other vegetation. Starlings may 

incorporate miscellaneous items such as cloth, string, 

plastic, feathers and fresh vegetation into the basic nesting 

material. The nest cup is 3 inches in diameter and 2.5 

inches deep. Eggs are pale blue. 

Mortality

The average life span of a starling is 3 to 4 years. The 

longest lived starling recorded for North America was 17 

years old. Annual mortality is 40 percent to 50 percent, but 

varies from 30 percent to 80 percent depending on 

location and weather conditions. Adult females have higher 

mortality rates than adult males. Approximately 80 percent 

of fledged young do not survive to reproduce. Mortality 

rates are greater in fall and winter because of migration, 

scarcity of natural foods and inclement weather.

Causes of mortality include disease, predation and 

starvation; none of these are believed to regulate the 

population. The major limiting factor may be the availability 

of nest sites. 

Each year, 60 to 75 million starlings die of natural causes. 

Lethal control programs by USDA WS annually take 1 to 3 

million starlings. Most are taken during late fall and winter 

at CAFOs for agricultural protection.

Population Status

The breeding population estimate for starlings in North 

America ranges from 60 to 150 million and may reach 

over 200 million by early fall. Although in long-term decline 

according to indices by the North American Breeding Bird 

Survey (BBS), the population in North America has 

remained relatively stable over the last 2 decades. 

According to BBS indices, only red-winged blackbirds 

(Agelaius phoeniceus) outnumber starlings. 

Habitat

Starlings are a peridomestic species, preferring to live in 

human-altered landscapes. They are adaptable and thus 

able to exploit numerous agricultural, urban and suburban 

habitats. Occasionally, they are found in remote areas, 

particularly near seaside cliffs. 

Behavior

From April through June, starlings either pair up with a 

mate or form small, non-breeding groups consisting of less 

than 100 birds. Individual family groups begin to aggregate 

within a few weeks after fledging. By June, aggregations 

may exceed 1,000 birds with flocks composed mostly of 

juveniles. Age classes coalesce by winter, but flocks may 

separate by sex. At preferred habitats such as CAFOs, 

flocks may consist predominately of males, sometimes 

more than 75 percent males. 

Page 18 WDM Technical Series—European Starlings
Main roosts in urban areas can harbor more than 100,000 

birds and be difficult to find. For example, a 100-yard 

section of a 4-lane railroad overpass in Omaha, Nebraska, 

held approximately 70,000 starlings during January. Urban 

roost sites are devoid of birds throughout the day; 

however, excretal whitewash on perching sites will indicate 

that a site could be a major roost. 

In suburban areas, starlings roost in conifer stands of 

residences and businesses, tree groves in parks, and in 

vegetated lowlands. Suburban roosts are typically smaller 

than urban roosts, consisting of just a few hundred birds. 

Although suburban roosts are smaller than urban roosts, 

many of them can be scattered throughout the suburban 

landscape. 

Urban roosts typically contain 10,000 to 30,000 starlings. 

Morning departures from urban roosts are difficult to track 

because starlings leave at first light and break into smaller 

flocks often going in several directions. Urban starlings 

use surrounding industrial parks, recreational areas, 

granaries, landfills, and suburban areas throughout the 

day. Very few starlings remain within the urban area 

proper. Outlying agricultural habitats within 25 miles of an 

urban roost may be used. Upon returning to an urban 

roost, starlings stage in secluded industrial areas and 

commercial areas within a few miles of the roost site.

U.S. Department of Agriculture Page 19

Starlings leave their roosts at sunrise. Departing birds 

generally take a direct route to foraging sites, rarely 

stopping. If CAFOs are being used, starlings may group 

nearby waiting for human activities to subside before going 

onsite. Foraging sites usually lie within 15 miles of the 

roost, but may be up to 50 miles away. The majority of 

starlings arrive at their foraging sites within a couple hours 

of sunrise.

Throughout fall and winter, foraging sites usually are 

centered on food sources provided by people, including 

landfills, granaries, food processing plants and CAFOs. 

These foraging areas are quite small, averaging only a few 

square miles. Starlings may use the same areas for several 

weeks or longer during winter.

By late afternoon, starlings begin a leisurely return to their 

roost. Returning flights can take up to 2 hours to complete, 

with several foraging stops along the way. Starlings may 

pass over smaller roosts, some lying closer to the main 

areas of daily activity, to reach larger roosts lying farther 

away. Flight lines leading toward large roosts may become 

obvious about an hour before sunset. 

Flocks often stage near the roost site using wooded areas, 

power lines, bridges, industrial superstructures and other 

sites with plentiful perches. Forays to nearby open grounds 

occur during the staging period, with birds briefly feeding. 

Birds begin entering the roost about 30 minutes before 

sunset. Starlings may use a large roost consistently for 

weeks or months.

Urban roost sites in city centers are spread across several 

urban features, including multi-storied buildings 

landscaping (especially, evergreens), monuments, signage 

bracing, superstructures and overpasses. Urban roosts are 

often satellite roosts, lying within a few miles of a larger, 

main roost. Locations of main roosts are usually in 

secluded urban areas, where public access is limited. 

Major roosts may be less than 5 miles from the urban city 

center roost. Birds switch occasionally between the 

satellite roost and main roost. Main roosts are found in 

industrial parks, landscaped commercial complexes, 

abandoned buildings, recreation areas, railroad yards, 

woodlots, wetlands, bridges and wooded buffer zones 

(Figure 17). 

Figure 17. Starlings entering a woodlot roost near Indianapolis, IN.
In agricultural landscapes, starlings often use wildlife 

refuges and game management areas for roosting. 

Wetlands with dense stands of emergent vegetation can 

be a preferred roosting habitat for mixed-species flocks, 

including blackbirds, robins and starlings. Thick stands of 

evergreens also are used. Roost sizes in agricultural 

landscapes can exceed 1 million birds during winter and 

attract flocks from over 50 miles. Starlings may also use 

CAFOs as roost sites. A CAFO can host a few hundred to a 

few thousand roosting starlings, depending on its size. 

Starlings that roost at CAFOs do not necessarily use these 

sites for daytime activities, leaving the CAFO shortly after 

sunrise and not returning until afternoon. 

In the Great Plains Region of the central and western U.S., 

wintering populations of starlings are highly concentrated 

because of the vast amount of treeless areas and the low 

densities of towns and cities. Here, CAFOs become focal 

points for daytime activities. Larger CAFOs can host 

hundreds-of-thousands of starlings per day (Figure 18). 

Smaller facilities host from 1,000 to 10,000 birds. 

Starlings may use the same CAFO throughout winter, rarely 

visiting other CAFOs unless they occur within a few miles.

In southern and mid-latitudinal regions of the U.S., flocks at 

CAFOs begin to thin by late January or mid-February, 

because resident starlings begin establishing breeding 

territories. At the same time, migrant populations 

experience migratory restlessness. Changes in activity 

areas, longer daily movements and use of other CAFOs 

begin in February. 

Starlings are short-distance migrants. Most travel only a 

few hundred miles to reach breeding territories; however, 

some travel more than 1,000 miles. Leg bands collected 

from a wintering population of starlings in Omaha, 

Nebraska, indicated that 50 percent were migrants. 

Year-round residents often are found below 40° N. 

Food Habits

Starlings are omnivorous, with a natural diet of 

invertebrates and wild fruits. A major portion of their 

invertebrate diet consists of coleopteran (beetle) and 

lepidopteron (butterfly and moth) larvae foraged from soils 

of lawns and fields. Ripening fruits, including pokeberry 

(Phytolacca americana) and Russian olive (Elaeagnus 

angustifolia), are eaten in summer and fall.

Access to natural foods lessens by early fall, and starlings 

switch to human-supplied foods, including ripening corn, 

commercial fruits, distiller’s grain, suet, pet food and 

livestock feed. They also forage on refuse and spillage at 

landfills, eateries and food processing plants.

Starlings develop a preference for high-energy fatty foods 

during winter. To support nutritional and energetic needs 

during colder periods, starlings eat an ounce or more of 

food per day. During winter, caged starlings in Kansas ate 

1 1⁄4 ounces of poultry pellets per bird per day. When fed a 

similar type pellet with a higher content of animal fat, 

starlings ate 0.6 ounces per bird per day, indicating that 

starlings were efficiently digesting animal fats.

Starlings can eat remarkable amounts of fruit because of 

their inefficiency in digesting high-carbohydrate foods. 

Caged starlings allowed to feed at liberty on blueberries 

ate 9 ounces per bird per day, nearly 3 times their 

bodyweight. Similarly, starlings are quite voracious with 

grapes, eating nearly 14 ounces per bird per day.

Page 20 WDM Technical Series—European Starlings

Figure 18. Starlings at a cattle feedlot.
U.S. Department of Agriculture Page 21

European starlings are not protected by the Migratory Bird 

Treaty Act (MBTA). Moreover, no state laws in the U.S. 

directly protect them. Methods of take in urban and 

suburban areas may be regulated by local ordinances. At 

the state level, natural resource agencies may require 

collection permits, even for an unprotected species like the 

starling. Before initiating a control program, always check 

with state and local resource management agencies, 

health departments and law enforcement agencies.

Legal Status
Page 22

Figure 1. Photo by Hays Cummings, Miami University 

Figure 2, 10 and 11. Photos by Susan Wieferich

Figure 3. Photo by W. MacDonald

Figure 4. Photo by Jim Carlson, USDA-APHIS Wildlife Services

Figure 5. Photo by Nick Dunlop

Figure 6, 13, and 18. Photos by James Thiele, USDA-APHIS Wildlife Services

Figure 7. Photo by Dionne Orr, USDA-APHIS Wildlife Services

Figure 8. Photo by Garrett Unrein, USDA-APHIS Wildlife Services

Figure 9 and 15. Photo by USDA-APHIS Wildlife Services

Figure 12. Photo by M. Smith

Figure 14. Photo by Megan Shave

Figure 16. Map by National Audubon Society

Figure 17. Photo by Channing Howard

We thank J. Glahn for his contributions from the previous version of this publication that was part of Prevention and 

Control of Wildlife Damage. Editors, Scott E. Hygnstrom, Robert M. Timm, Gary E. Larson. 1994. University of NebraskaLincoln. 2 vols.

Acknowledgements

Disclaimer

Wildlife can threaten the health and safety of you and 

others in the area. Use of damage prevention and control 

methods also may pose risks to humans, pets, livestock, 

other non-target animals, and the environment. Be aware 

of the risks and take steps to reduce or eliminate those 

risks. 

Some methods mentioned in this document may not be 

legal, permitted, or appropriate in your area. Read and 

follow all pesticide label recommendations and local 

requirements. Check with personnel from your state 

wildlife agency and local officials to determine if methods 

are acceptable and allowed. 

Mention of any products, trademarks, or brand names 

does not constitute endorsement, nor does omission 

constitute criticism. 

Glossary

CAFOs: concentrated animal feeding operations; feedlots

Omnivorous: Eats both plants and animals 

Prebaiting: The practice of providing non-treated bait to 

animals so they become accustomed to it, prior to 

providing treated or toxic bait. 

Mandible: either the upper or lower part of a bird’s beak 

Migratory restlessness: Anxiety or restlessness 

experienced by animals prior to migration; occurs primarily 

in species that migrate long distances 

Take: Pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or 

collect a protected species, or attempt to pursue, hunt, 

shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect a protected 

species 

Key Words

Confined Animal Feeding Operations, CAFO, dairies, 

disease, DRC-1339, European starlings, feedlots, fruit 

damage, invasive species, sweet corn damage, urban 

roosts

Citation

Homan, H.J., R.J. Johnson, J.R. Thiele, and G.M. Linz. 2017. 

European Starlings. Wildlife Damage Management 

Technical Series. USDA, APHIS, WS National Wildlife 

Research Center. Ft. Collins, Colorado. 26p.

WDM Technical Series—European Starlings
Page 23

Resources

Anderson, A., C.A. Lindell, K.M. Moxcey, W.F. Siemer, G.M. Linz, P.D. Curtis, J.E. Carroll, C.L. Burrows, J.R. 

Boulanger, K.M.M. Steensma, and S.A. Shwiff. 2013. Bird damage to select fruit crops: The cost of damage and 

the benefits of control in five states. Crop Protection 52:103–109.

Carlson, J.C., A.B. Franklin, D.R. Hyatt, S.E. Pettit, and G.M. Linz. 2011. The role of starlings in the spread of 

Salmonella within concentrated animal feeding operations. Journal of Applied Ecology 48:479–486.

Cernicchiaro, N., D.l. Pearl, S.A. McEwen, L. Harpster, H.J. Homan, G.M. Linz, and J.T. LeJeune. 2012. Association 

of wild bird density and farm management factors with the prevalence of E. coli O157 in dairy herds in Ohio (2007

–2009). Zoonoses and Public Health 59:320–329.

European starling general information: http://www.birds.cornell.edu/onlineguide/

Gaukler, S. M., H.J. Homan, G.M. Linz, and W.J. Bleier. 2012. Using radio-telemetry to assess the risk European 

starlings pose in pathogen transmission among feedlots. Human-Wildlife Interactions 6:30–37.

Glahn, J.F., D.J. Twedt, and D.L. Otis. 1983. Estimating feed loss from starling use of livestock feed troughs. 

Wildlife Society Bulletin 11:366–372.

Homan, H.J., A.A. Slowick, L.B. Penry, G.M. Linz, and W. Anderson. 2012. Site use of European starlings wintering 

in central New Jersey. Vertebrate Pest Conference 25:230-234.

Homan, H.J., J.T. LeJeune, D.L. Pearl, T.W. Seamans, A.A. Slowik, M.R. Morasch, and G. M. Linz. 2013. Use of 

dairies by post-reproductive flocks of European starlings. Journal of Dairy Science 96:4487–4493.

Homan, H.J., R.S. Stahl, and G.M. Linz. 2013. Comparison of two models for estimating mortality from baitings 

with Compound DRC-1339 Concentrate avicide. Crop Protection 45:71–75.

Homan, H.J., R.S. Stahl, and G.M. Linz. 2011. Comparing a bioenergetics model with feeding rates of caged 

European starlings. Journal of Wildlife Management 75:126–131. 

Homan, H.J., G.M. Linz, S. Beckerman, A.G. Duffiney, T.D. Halstead. 2010. European starling preferences for bait 

substrates used in DRC-1339 applications. Human Wildlife Conflicts 4:25–31.

Homan, H.J., A.A. Slowik, L.B. Penry, G.M. Linz, M.J. Bodenchuk, and R.L. Gilliland. 2010. Site use of European 

starlings captured and radio-tagged at Texas feedlots during winter. Vertebrate Pest Conference 24:250–256.

Homan, H.J., R.S. Stahl, J.J. Johnston, and G.M. Linz. 2005. Estimating DRC-1339 mortality using avian 

bioenergetics: a case study of the European starlings. Wildlife Damage Management Conference 11:202–208.

Linz, G.M., H.J. Homan, S.M. Gaukler, L.B. Penry, and W.J. Bleier. 2007. European starlings: a review of an invasive 

species with far-reaching impacts. Management of Invasive Species Conference, August 7–9, 2007, Fort Collins, 

Colorado, USA. Proceedings of the Management of Invasive Species Conference. Pg. 378–386.

U.S. Department of Agriculture
Page 24 U.S. Department of Agriculture

Shwiff, S.A., J.C. Carlson, J.H. Glass, J. Suckow, M.S. Lowney, K.M. Moxcey, B. Larson, and G.M. Linz. 2012. 

Producer survey of bird-livestock interactions in commercial dairies. Journal of Dairy Science 95:6820–6829.

Sodium Lauryl Sulfate Technical Note: https://www.aphis.usda.gov/wildlife_damage/nwrc/publications/

Tech_Notes/TN_SodiumLaurylSulfate.pdf

Starling nest-box trap: http://www.chuckspurplemartinpage.com/startrap.htm

Swirski, A.L., D.L. Pearl, M.L. Williams, H.J. Homan, G.M. Linz, N. Cernicchiaro, and J.T. LeJeune. 2014. Spatial 

epidemiology of Escherichia coli O157:H7 in dairy cattle in relation to night roosts of Sturnus vulgaris (European 

starling) in Ohio, USA (2007–2009). Zoonoses and Public Health:1–9.

Thiele, J.R., H.J. Homan, G.M. Linz, and G.W. Unrein. 2012. Developing an effective management plan for starlings 

roosting in downtown Omaha, Nebraska. Proceedings of the Wildlife Damage Management Conference 14:87–90.
Damage Management Methods for European Starlings

Page 25

Appendix 1

 

Type of Control 

 

 

Available Management Options 

 

Exclusion  Mesh netting or screening < 1 ” vinyl strip doors

 Canted (greater than or equal to 45°) or spiked ledges

 Nest box designs that prevent starling occupancy ; < 1 ” diameter entry hole

Frightening Devices 

and Agents

 Propane cannons and associated pyrotechnics

 Aerial predator decoys and kites, flash tape, scare-eye balloons, scarecrows, lasers

 4-aminopyridine (Avitrol®)

 Falconry

Habitat Modification  Manage tree stands and wetland emergents

 Automatic feeders or hinged-lid feeders

 Feed storage sites that can be closed or covered 

 Reduce water levels in watering troughs

 Large or unusually shaped food pellets

Repellents  9,10 anthraquinone (AG), registered as Avipel® (seed treatment)

 Methyl anthranilate (fruit crops)

 Polybutenes (perch deterrents)

Shooting  12 gauge shotgun with #6 steel shot

 Pellet gun

Toxicants Compound DRC-1339 Concentrate (Restricted use pesticide)

Trapping Cage and nest box traps

Other Sodium lauryl sulfate (wetting agent for roosts); kestrel nest boxes

16

9

16

9
Estimating Cost-Benefit Ratios for Bird Management

Page 26

Appendix 2

A rule-of-thumb for evaluating the economic feasibility of a management method involves adding pretreatment 

costs of bird damage and the amortized costs of deploying a method and then subtracting the savings gained 

from applying the treatment. The resulting sum must be greater than the depreciated costs. A cost:benefit 

ratio of 1:2 or greater should be expected. Assuming all crop inputs were made before damage occurred, a 

general formula for agricultural and fruit crops would be as follows (using acres as the areal unit): 

(A x B + C/D) – ([A x B] – [A x E)] > F 

Where

A = economic production per acre (i.e., price received at sale)

B = proportion of anticipated bird damage under no treatment 

C = amortized cost of using method (including labor, equipment and maintenance) 

D = acres of crop protected by method

E = proportion of damage after implementing treatment

F = depreciated value of method or other accounting for lost value and function