For Public Distribution

Protecting the Flying Public and Minimizing Economic 

Losses within the Aviation Industry

Assistance provided by USDA-APHIS-Wildlife Services

to reduce Wildlife Hazards to Aviation

Fiscal Year 2018

Wildlife biologists and technicians with the USDA-APHIS-Wildlife Services Program provided 

297 staff years of assistance at 872 civil airports and military airbases in FY 2018 to reduce 

wildlife hazards to aviation. Activities included a broad range of technical assistance (e.g., 

training of airport personnel, monitoring wildlife populations) and direct management activities 

(e.g., wildlife dispersal, habitat modification).

Compiled by

Michael J. Begier, National Coordinator, Airport Wildlife Hazards Program, U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, Wildlife Services, Washington, DC 

20250-3402 USA (mike.begier@usda.gov)

Richard A. Dolbeer, PhD, Science Adviser, Airport Wildlife Hazards Program, U.S. Department 

of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, Wildlife Services, 6100 Columbus 

Avenue, Sandusky, OH 44870 USA (dolbeer@bex.net)

Jenny E. Washburn, Airport Wildlife Hazards Program, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Animal 

and Plant Health Inspection Service, Wildlife Services, 6100 Columbus Avenue, Sandusky, OH 

44870 USA (Jenny.E.Washburn@usda.gov)

January 2019
For Public Distribution

1

Protecting the Flying Public and Minimizing Economic Losses within the 

Aviation Industry

Assistance provided and Cooperator Funding received by USDA-APHIS- Wildlife Services 

to reduce Wildlife Hazards to Aviation in FY 2018

Michael J. Begier, National Coordinator, Airport Wildlife Hazards Program, U.S. Department 

of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, Wildlife Services, Washington, 

DC 20250-3402 USA (mike.begier@usda.gov)

Richard A. Dolbeer, PhD, Science Adviser, Airport Wildlife Hazards Program, U.S. 

Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, Wildlife Services, 

6100 Columbus Avenue, Sandusky, OH 44870 USA (dolbeer@bex.net)

Jenny E. Washburn, Airport Wildlife Hazards Program, U.S. Department of Agriculture, 

Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, Wildlife Services, 6100 Columbus Avenue, 

Sandusky, OH 44870 USA (Jenny.E.Washburn@usda.gov)

1. Why are aircraft collisions with wildlife a concern at airports? 

Aircraft collisions with birds and other wildlife (wildlife strikes) are an increasingly serious 

economic and safety problem (Marra et al. 2009). Dolbeer and Begier (2019) estimated wildlife 

strikes (96% involving birds) cost the civil aviation industry in the USA a minimum of $142

million in 2017. Allan and Orosz (2001) estimated that bird strikes annually cost commercial air 

carriers over $1.2 billion worldwide, 1999-2000. Globally, bird and other wildlife strikes killed 

more than 287 people and destroyed over 263 aircraft from 1988 – 2018 (Richardson and West 

2000; Thorpe 2012, Shaw and Dolbeer 2018).

Efforts to reduce wildlife strikes need to focus on the airport environment because about 72% of 

all reported bird strikes with civil aircraft in USA occur at less than 500 feet above ground level 

(AGL; Dolbeer 2006, Dolbeer and Begier 2019). Of the 58 large (maximum take-off weight 

>5,700 kg) turbine-powered aircraft (47 civil, 11 military) confirmed to have been destroyed 

because of bird or other wildlife strikes since 1960 worldwide, 55 (94%) of the strikes occurred 

during take-off or landing phases of flight at <500 feet AGL (Dolbeer 2008; Dolbeer, 

unpublished data).

2. Why is the wildlife-strike problem increasing? 

Wildlife strikes have increased in the past 40 years because of a combination of expanding

populations of many wildlife species that are hazardous to aviation and increasing numbers of 

turbofan-powered aircraft (Dolbeer and Begier 2019). For example, Dolbeer and Begier (2013) 

examined the estimated population trends and numbers for the 21 species of birds in North 

America with mean body masses >4 lbs and at least 10 strikes with civil aircraft from 1990-

2012. Of these 21 species, 17 (e.g., Canada and snow geese, white and brown pelicans, turkey 

and black vultures, sandhill cranes, wild turkeys, bald eagles, great blue herons, and doublecrested cormorants) had shown population increases from 1990-2012 with a net gain of 17 

million birds. Previous research had documented that 13 of the 14 bird species in North America 

with mean body masses >8 lbs showed significant population increases from 1970 to the early 
USDA-APHIS-Wildlife Services Assistance at Airports, FY2018—Begier, Dolbeer, & Washburn 2

For Public Distribution

1990s (Dolbeer and Eschenfelder 2003). The white-tailed deer population increased from about 

15 million in 1984 to over 28 million by 2010 (McCabe and McCabe 1997, VerCauteren et al. 

2011). Furthermore, most of these species have adapted to living in urban environments, 

including airports (e.g., Smith et al. 1999; Rutledge et al. 2015). 

In addition, birds are less able to detect and avoid the quieter turbofan-powered aircraft in use 

today compared to older, noisier aircraft (Burger 1983, Kelly et al. 2001). Commercial aircraft 

movements in the USA increased from about 18 million in 1980 to 29 million in 2000 and have 

subsequently declined to about 25 million in 2018 (FAA 2019a). General aviation aircraft 

movements in the USA declined from about 90 million in 1980 to 69 million in 2018. Passenger 

enplanements in the USA increased from about 495 million in 1990 to 705 million in 2000 and 

857 million in 2018.

3. Can airport authorities and managers be held liable for wildlife strikes? 

Based on a summary of cases by MacKinnon et al. (2001), Dale (2009), and Dolbeer (2018) and 

legal reviews by Michael (1986), Wilkinson (1998), Matijaca (2001, 2005), and Rillstone and 

Dineen (2013), it is apparent that airport operators must exercise “due diligence” in managing 

wildlife hazards to avoid potentially serious liability issues. In the USA, the exercise of “due 

diligence” to manage wildlife hazards initially involves a Wildlife Hazard Assessment (WHA) at 

the airport. Based on the WHA, a Wildlife Hazard Management Plan (WHMP) may be needed

for airports that are certificated by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) for passenger 

service under U.S. Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR Part 139.337, hereafter referred to as 

Part 139-certificated airports). As of September 2018, there were 526 Part 139-certificated 

airports in the USA (FAA 2019b). Airports that are not Part 139-certificated but that accept 

federal grant-in-aid funding may also be required to conduct WHAs and develop WHMPs (FAA 

Advisory Circular 150/5200-33b; FAA 2019c).

4. How does an airport manage wildlife hazards? 

Managing bird and other wildlife hazards at airports is a complex, public-sensitive endeavor 

involving many species of wildlife governed by the international Migratory Bird Treaty Act and 

various federal, state and local regulations. For example, 550 species of birds, 44 species of 

terrestrial mammals, 26 species of bats, and 20 species of reptiles were identified in wildlife 

strikes with civil aircraft in the USA, 1990-2017 (Dolbeer and Begier 2019). Because of the 

complexity and sensitivity involved in managing wildlife hazards, airports are required to 

employ professional biologists trained in wildlife hazard management at airports to assess 

hazards, provide training, and to assist in the development, implementation, and evaluation of 

WHMPs (14 CFR Part 139.337 and FAA Advisory Circular 150/5200-36B [FAA 2019c]). Such 

professionally developed and implemented management plans minimize the likelihood of 

catastrophic or substantial-damage wildlife strikes on an airport and provide crucial support 

during litigation in the aftermath of any significant strike event that might occur. Cleary and 

Dolbeer (2005) provide detailed information on the development and implementation of these 

management plans as well as on FAA regulations and guidelines regarding wildlife hazards to 

aviation. DeVault et al. (2013) discuss the scientific foundations of wildlife management in 

airport environments. 
USDA-APHIS-Wildlife Services Assistance at Airports, FY2018—Begier, Dolbeer, & Washburn 3

For Public Distribution

5. What role does USDA-APHIS-Wildlife Services (WS) play in managing wildlife hazards 

at airports?

The USDA-APHIS-WS program provides federal leadership for resolving conflicts between 

wildlife and people. The WS program, with professional biologists available for consultation 

and other services in all 50 States and U.S. Territories and for U.S. military installations 

worldwide, is internationally recognized for research and management programs to resolve 

conflicts between wildlife and humans. USDA-APHIS-WS’s National Wildlife Research Center,

headquartered in Colorado with field stations in 7 other states, provides a scientific foundation 

for management programs.

The FAA, with two staff wildlife biologists to deal with wildlife hazards to aviation nationwide, 

has historically partnered with the WS program to provide professional assistance to airports. 

The FAA has a Memorandum-of-Understanding (MOU) with WS (signed in 1978 and updated 

in 1989 and 2005) stating that “FAA or the certificated airport may request technical support

from WS to lessen wildlife hazards” (Cleary and Dolbeer 2005). In addition, the Department of 

Defense (DoD) has a similar MOU with WS (signed in 1990) for assistance with wildlife 

damage issues at DoD facilities (Cleary and Dolbeer 2005). Finally, the National Association of 

State Aviation Officials (NASAO) and WS have a MOU (signed in 2006 and updated and 

expanded in 2013 to include the FAA) which states that the three organizations have a mutual 

goal “to provide technical and operational assistance and necessary training to the aviation 

community in order to ultimately reduce the risk of wildlife hazards and ensure safer operations 

at airports.” Many wildlife hazard management programs at airports have been developed, 

implemented or overseen by WS biologists. USDA-APHIS-WS receives no appropriated federal 

funding to deal with wildlife hazards at airports but is authorized by the U.S. Congress to enter 

into cooperative service agreements with airport authorities and other entities to provide services 

on a cost-reimbursable basis.

5a. Managing wildlife hazards at airports and air bases is a specialized, public-sensitive 

activity: are WS biologists qualified and trained to work in this environment? 

In 1996, WS developed a 3-day Airport Training Course for WS biologists to ensure that 

employees conducting work at airports understood the airport environment and the regulations, 

policies, and agency roles for both civil and military aviation. As of January 2018, over 550 WS 

biologists have successfully passed this FAA-approved course (FAA Advisory Circular 

150/5200-36B [FAA 2019c]) of which about 440 are current employees. Additionally, because 

WS biologists address wildlife damage management issues throughout the USA and abroad (see 

section 5b below), WS possesses a network of experienced employees to exchange information 

regarding wildlife damage management techniques, especially those best suited for issues arising 

at airports. Also, WS biologists working at airports and military airbases are scientifically 

supported by USDA-APHIS-WS’s National Wildlife Research Center (see DeVault et al. 2013 

and Section 5e below).

5b. At how many airports did WS biologists provide assistance in reducing wildlife hazards 

in 2018?

The number of civil and military airports requesting assistance from WS has steadily grown over 

the past 29 years in concert with the increased awareness of the risk that wildlife poses to 

aviation safety. WS assistance grew from primarily short-term consultative work (e.g., 1-day 
USDA-APHIS-Wildlife Services Assistance at Airports, FY2018—Begier, Dolbeer, & Washburn 4

For Public Distribution

site visits) at 42 airports in 1990ato 298 staff-years of assistance at 872 airports in 2018 (743

civil and 129 military) in 50 states, 4 U.S. territories, and 15 foreign countries (Table 1, Figures 

1, 2). WS provided full-time (>1 staff year) of assistance at 144 airports in 2018 (Table 2). In 

2018, assistance was provided at 410 (78%) of the 526 Part 139- certificated airports in the USA 

(Table 3). The 410 certificated civil airports where WS provided assistance served 762 million 

commercial passengers and recorded 19.6 million and 13.1 million commercial and general 

aviation (GA) aircraft movements, respectively, in 2018 (Table 4). The 333 non-certificated 

civil airports in USA where WS provided assistance recorded 0.6 million and 10.5 million 

commercial and GA aircraft movements, respectively.

5c. What types of assistance were provided by WS biologists at airports to reduce wildlife 

hazards in 2018?

WS biologists provided a wide range of technical and direct management assistance at airports 

(Tables 5, 6; Figure 3). Consultations with airport authorities regarding wildlife issues was the 

most common technical service provided (801 airports) followed by training of airport personnel 

in wildlife identification and control methods (417 airports involving 4,960 personnel). Other 

technical assistance provided included development and revisions of Wildlife Hazard 

Management Plans, Wildlife Hazard Assessments, and Environmental Assessments (205, 116, 

and 88 airports, respectively).

Direct management assistance included lethal removal of hazardous wildlife (346 airports), nonlethal dispersal of hazardous wildlife (321 airports), modification of habitats to discourage 

wildlife (263 airports), and capture and translocation of wildlife away from the airport (238

airports, Table 5). Lethal control of protected species was done under state and federal permits 

as a last option after solely non-lethal options had been determined to be ineffective or 

impractical.

In addition to work done on airport property, WS biologists provided technical and direct 

management assistance regarding off-airport wildlife attractants at 184 airports (Table 5).

5d. At how many airports did technical or direct management assistance by WS biologists 

result in a reduction, suppression, or prevention of hazards caused by wildlife in 2018? 

WS biologists estimated that technical or direct management assistance resulted in a reduction, 

suppression, or prevention of wildlife hazards at 597 (67%) of the 872 airports where some type 

of assistance was provided (Table 7, Figure 4). This total included 283 (69%) of the 410 Part 

139-certificated civil airports assisted. These estimates of successful intervention are 

conservative. WS biologists indicated that there was insufficient time since management actions 

had been implemented or insufficient information from airport personnel to assess whether or not 

hazards had been reduced, suppressed, or prevented on at least 50 airports. Wenning et al. 

(2004), Dolbeer et al. (2007, 2014), and Dolbeer and Franklin (2013) provided summaries of 

specific accomplishments by WS biologists at airports and airbases nationwide in reducing 

wildlife hazards since 1990. Recent analyses have documented an overall national decline in 

damaging wildlife strikes in the airport environment at Part 139-certificated airports during the 

past decade (Dolbeer 2011; Dolbeer et al. 2014, Dolbeer and Begier 2019). The work by WS 

personnel, as documented in this report, has likely been a major factor in the decline in these 

damaging wildlife strikes.

 

a Years refer to Federal Fiscal Years (e.g., 1990 = 1 Oct 1989-30 Sep 1990).
USDA-APHIS-Wildlife Services Assistance at Airports, FY2018—Begier, Dolbeer, & Washburn 5

For Public Distribution

5e. Besides technical and direct management assistance at airports, what other roles does 

WS play in mitigating wildlife hazards to aviation?

WS biologists working at airports and airbases are supported by USDA-APHIS-WS’s National 

Wildlife Research Center (NWRC). NWRC has a field station (located at NASA’s Glenn 

Research Center, Plum Brook Station near Sandusky, Ohio) devoted to applied research in 

methods to mitigate wildlife hazards to aviation. Numerous research collaborations involving

NWRC have occurred or are ongoing at civil and military airports through interagency and 

cooperative agreements with other government agencies, airports, universities, and private 

companies (Table 8). In addition, WS, through an interagency agreement with the FAA, manages 

the National Wildlife Strike Database (NWSD) which contains over 212,000 reports of wildlife 

strikes with civil aircraft in USA, 1990-2018. The NWSD provides the scientific foundation for 

research and management activities and for the development of national policies and regulations 

related to mitigating the risk of wildlife strikes to aircraft (e.g., Cleary and Dolbeer 2005;

Dolbeer and Wright 2009; DeVault et al. 2011; Dolbeer et al. 2014; Dolbeer and Begier 2019;

FAA 2019c).

6. Conclusions 

Because of expanding populations of many wildlife species that are hazardous to aviation and the 

adaptation of these species to urban environments, mitigation efforts to minimize the risk of 

wildlife strikes are increasingly important at both civil and military airports worldwide. In 

response, USDA-APHIS-WS has developed a national network of professional wildlife 

biologists who are highly qualified and specifically trained to deal with these unique, complex 

and public-sensitive challenges. As documented in this report, WS provides substantial 

assistance and effective, science-based mitigation for a variety of wildlife hazard issues at 

airports. However, a major challenge facing WS is that no Congressional funding is available to 

provide a foundation for wildlife hazard mitigation work. Thus, assistance provided by WS is 

often limited by the availability of funds by cooperators on an annual basis. In many situations, 

WS is unable to address significant wildlife hazard issues requested and desired by cooperators 

because no funding or insufficient funding is available to do the necessary work. 
USDA-APHIS-Wildlife Services Assistance at Airports, FY2018—Begier, Dolbeer, & Washburn 6

For Public Distribution

7. References cited

Allan, J. R., and A. P. Orosz. 2001. The costs of birdstrikes to commercial aviation. Pages 218-

226 in Bird Strike 2001, Proceedings of the Bird Strike Committee-USA/Canada meeting. 

Calgary, Alberta, Canada: Transport Canada, Ottawa, Ontario Canada.

Burger, J. 1983. Jet aircraft noise and bird strikes: why more birds are being hit. Environmental 

Pollution (Series A) 30:143-152.

Cleary, E. C., and R. A. Dolbeer. 2005. Wildlife hazard management at airports, a manual for 

airport personnel (2nd edition). U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation 

Administration, Office of Airport Safety and Standards, Washington, D.C., USA. 348 pages

(http://wildlife-mitigation.tc.faa.gov/).

Dale, L. 2009. Personal liability in the aftermath of bird strikes – a costly consideration. 

Human-Wildlife Conflicts 3(2): 216-225.

DeVault, T. L., J. L. Belant, B. F. Blackbird, and T. W. Seamans. 2011. Interspecific variation 

in wildlife hazards to aircraft: implications for airport wildlife management. Wildlife Society 

Bulletin 35:394-402.

DeVault, T. L., B. F. Blackwell, and J. L. Belant, editors. 2013. Wildlife in airport environments:

preventing animal – aircraft collisions through science-based management. The Johns 

Hopkins University Press. Baltimore, Maryland, USA.

Dolbeer, R. A. 2006. Height distribution of birds recorded by collisions with aircraft. Journal of 

Wildlife Management 70 (5): 1345-1350.

Dolbeer, R. A. 2008. Bird damage to turbofan and turbojet engines in relation to phase of flight -

why speed matters. Aero-Safety World: 3(6):22-26. Flight Safety Foundation, Alexandria, 

Virginia, USA.

Dolbeer, R. A. 2011. Increasing trend of damaging bird strikes with aircraft outside the airport 

boundary: implications for mitigation measures. Human-Wildlife Interactions 5 (2):235-248.

Dolbeer, R. A. 2016. Trends in bird strikes causing damage to civil transport aircraft in USA, 

2011-2015. Special report submitted to Commercial Aviation Safety Team at request of Joint 

Implementation Management Data Analysis Team (JIMDAT). Washington D.C., USA. 

August. 9 pages.

Dolbeer, R. A. 2018. Bird and other wildlife hazards at airports: liability issues for airport 

managers. Special Report, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health 

Inspection Service, Wildlife Services, Washington, D.C., USA 20250. Version 2018.1. 6

pages.

Dolbeer, R. A., and M. J. Begier. 2012. Comparison of wildlife strike data among airports to 

improve aviation safety. Proceedings of the 30th International Bird Strike Committee 

meeting. Stavanger, Norway.

Dolbeer, R. A., and M. J. Begier. 2013. Population trends for large bird species in North America 

in relation to aircraft engine standards. Bird Strike Committee-USA. Milwaukee, Wisconsin, 

USA.
USDA-APHIS-Wildlife Services Assistance at Airports, FY2018—Begier, Dolbeer, & Washburn 7

For Public Distribution

Dolbeer, R. A., and M. J. Beiger. 2019. Wildlife strikes to civil aircraft in the United States, 

1990-2017. U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Office of 

Airport Safety and Standards, Serial Report No. 24, Washington, D.C., USA. 113 pages.

Dolbeer, R. A., M. J. Begier, and T. J. Olexa. 2007. Protecting military air bases from Bird 

Aircraft Strike Hazards (BASH). Special Report, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Wildlife 

Services, Airport Wildlife Hazards Program, Sandusky, Ohio, USA. 21 pages.

Dolbeer, R. A., and P. Eschenfelder. 2003. Amplified bird-strike risks related to population 

increases of large birds in North America. Pages 49-67 in Proceedings of the 26th 

International Bird Strike Committee meeting. Warsaw, Poland.

Dolbeer, R. A., and A. B. Franklin. 2013. Population management. Chapter 7, Pages 67 -75 in 

Wildlife in airport environments: preventing animal – aircraft collisions through sciencebased management. T. L. DeVault, B. F. Blackwell, and J. L. Belant, editors. The Johns 

Hopkins University Press. Baltimore, Maryland, USA. 

Dolbeer, R. A., J. L. Seubert, and M. J. Begier. 2014. Population trends of resident and migratory 

Canada geese in relation to strikes with civil aircraft. Human-Wildlife Interactions 8 (1): 88 -

99.

Dolbeer, R. A., and S. E. Wright. 2009. Safety Management Systems: how useful will the FAA 

National Wildlife Strike Database be? Human-Wildlife Conflicts 3(2):167-178.

FAA. 2019a. Aircraft movements and passenger enplanements: http://taf.faa.gov/. Federal 

Aviation Administration, Washington, D.C., USA.

FAA. 2019b. 14CFR Part 139-certificated airports 

http://www.faa.gov/airports/airport_safety/part139_cert/. Federal Aviation Administration, 

Washington, D.C., USA.

FAA. 2019c. Advisory Circulars: http://www.faa.gov/airports/resources/advisory_circulars/. 

Federal Aviation Administration, Washington, D.C., USA.

Kelly, T. C., M. J. A. O’Callaghan, and R. Bolger. 2001. The avoidance behaviour shown by the 

rook (Corvus frugilegus) to commercial aircraft. Pages 291-299 in H. J. Pelz, D. P. Cowan, 

and C. J. Feare (Editors), Advances in vertebrate pest management II. Filander Verlag, Fürth, 

Germany.

MacKinnon, B., R. Sowden, and S. Dudley (Editors). 2001. Sharing the skies: an aviation guide 

to the management of wildlife hazards. Transport Canada, Aviation Publishing Division, 

Tower C, 330 Sparks Street, Ottawa, Ontario, K1A 0N8 Canada. 316 pages.

Marra, P. P., C. J. Dove, R. A. Dolbeer, N. F. Dahlan, M. Heacker, J. F. Whatton, N. E. Diggs, 

C. France, and G. A. Henkes. 2009. Migratory Canada geese cause crash of US Airways 

Flight 1549. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment. 7(6): 297-301.

Matijaca, A. 2001. Damage liability and compensation in case of bird strike. Pages 89-100 in

Bird Strike 2001. Proceedings of the Bird Strike Committee-USA/Canada meeting, Calgary, 

Alberta. Transport Canada, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.

Matijaca, A. 2005. Court judgments: Pro and contra. Pages 135-148 in Proceedings of the 27th 

International Bird Strike Committee Meeting (Volume 1). Athens, Greece. 
USDA-APHIS-Wildlife Services Assistance at Airports, FY2018—Begier, Dolbeer, & Washburn 8

For Public Distribution

Michael, R. A. 1986. Keep your eye on the birdie: aircraft engine bird ingestion. Journal of Air 

Law and Commerce. Space Law Issue. Summer 1986, Number 4:1007-1035.

Richardson, W. J., and T. West. 2000. Serious birdstrike accidents to military aircraft: updated 

list and summary. Pages 67-98 in Proceedings of 25th International Bird Strike Committee 

meeting. Amsterdam, the Netherlands.

Rillstone, D. J., and C. M. Dineen. 2013. Airport responsibility for wildlife management. 

Transportation Research Board’s Airport Cooperative Research Program (ACRP) Legal 

Research Digest 20. 164 pages. http://www.trb.org/Publications/Blurbs/169414.aspx.

Rutledge, M.E., C.E. Moorman, B.E. Washburn, and C.S. Deperno. 2015. Evaluation of resident 

Canada goose movements to reduce the risk of goose-aircraft collisions at suburban airports. 

Journal of Wildlife Management 79(7):1185-1191.

Shaw, P., and R. A. Dolbeer. 2018. http://www.avisure.com/about-us/fatalities-anddestroyedaircraft-due-to-wildlife-strikes-1912-to-present/. 

Smith, A., S. R. Craven, and P. D. Curtis. 1999. Managing Canada geese in urban environments. 

Jack Berryman Institute Publication 16, and Cornell Cooperative Extension, Ithaca, New 

York, USA. 42 pages.

Thorpe, J. 2012. 100 years of fatalities and destroyed civil aircraft due to bird strikes. 

Proceedings of the 30th International Bird Strike Committee Meeting. Stavanger, Norway. 

(http://www.int-birdstrike.org).

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. Pages 295-301 in

Proceedings of 21st Vertebrate Pest Conference, University of California, Davis, California, 

USA.

Wilkinson, C. 1998. Now aviation insurers must watch the birdie. Insurance Day. Lloyd’s of 

London Press Ltd, London, UK. 5 February. 2 pages.
USDA-APHIS-Wildlife Services Assistance at Airports, FY2018—Begier, Dolbeer, & Washburn 9

For Public Distribution

Table 1. Staff-years expended and number of civil airports (Part 139 and General Aviation)aand 

military airbases served by USDA-APHIS-Wildlife Services (WS) biologists in provision of technical 

and direct management assistance to reduce wildlife hazards to aviation, FY 2018.

Number of airports assisted Number of airports assisted

State/

Terr.

WS 

staff 

years

Civil

(P139)

Civil 

(GA)

Military TotalState/

Terr.

WS 

staff 

years

Civil

(P139)

Civil 

(GA)

Military Total

AK 18.93 22 8 3 33 ND 2.08 8 2 2 12

AL 4.23 5 8 5 18 NE 4.01 9 0 1 10

AR 1.01 6 8 1 15 NH 2.01 2 8 0 10

AZ 3.40 4 0 3 7 NJ 6.73 4 7 1 12

CA 18.38 16 5 11 32 NM 2.10 3 4 1 8

CO 10.69 12 11 1 24 NV 4.30 1 0 3 4

CT 0.71 4 6 0 10 NY 17.20 8 2 0 10

DE 2.02 1 2 1 4 OH 5.08 12 16 1 29

FL 11.65 20 9 19 48 OK 8.37 3 10 4 17

GA 2.49 4 1 2 7 OR 1.57 7 1 0 8

GUb 1.41 4 0 1 5 PA 7.95 16 13 1 30

HI 34.27 8 7 3 18 PR 1.42 3 0 0 3

IA 1.80 7 6 0 13 RI 0.50 1 5 0 6

ID 0.38 5 0 0 5 SC 7.14 8 7 4 19

IL 9.27 16 22 0 38 SD 0.26 1 0 1 2

IN 2.72 10 11 1 22 TN 2.57 7 3 0 10

KS 3.18 9 6 2 17 TX 9.81 18 17 8 43

KY 2.09 6 3 1 10 USVI 1.00 2 0 0 2

LA 3.14 9 4 2 15 UT 4.15 5 2 1 8

MA 1.73 9 6 1 16 VA 13.94 8 2 6 16

MD 8.05 3 3 2 8 VT 2.63 2 6 0 8

ME 0.72 4 9 0 13 WA 7.63 11 12 2 25

MI 4.49 19 5 2 26 WI 2.23 8 25 1 34

MN 2.71 9 22 0 31 WV 2.06 6 1 0 7

MO 6.94 10 3 1 14 WY 0.08 7 1 0 8

MS 3.20 8 2 2 12 Civ-Fgn 0.00 0 0 0 0

MT 1.18 8 0 0 8 Mil-Fgnc 5.25 0 0 23 23

NC 14.92 12 22 5 39 Totald 297.75 410 333 129 872

a Part 139 airports are certificated for passenger service (see footnote in Table 3). Military total includes 1

U.S. Air Force Base (Dover) certificated under Part 139; 118 civil airports were joint-use with military, 

including 39 with Air National Guard units.

b Includes 3 airports in Pacific Island Territories outside of Guam.

c U.S. military airbases at foreign locations.

d See Figures 1 and 2 for trends in numbers of airports served and staff-years of assistance, 1990 - 2018.
USDA-APHIS-Wildlife Services Assistance at Airports, FY2018—Begier, Dolbeer, & Washburn 10

For Public Distribution

Table 2. Distribution of staff years expended at 872 civil and military airports where USDAAPHIS-Wildlife Services (WS) biologists provided technical and direct management assistance to 

reduce wildlife hazards to aviation, FY 2018. 

WS staff years expended by number of airportsa

Type of 

airport < 0.10 

0.11 to

0.25 

0.26 to 

0.50 

0.51 to 

0.99 

1.00 to 

5.50 

Total 

airports

Civilb559 51 39 17 77 743

Military 45 5 7 5 67 129

Total 604 56 46 22 144 872

a In FY 2018, 298 staff years of assistance was provided at the 872 civil and military airports (Table 1).

b Includes 118 airports with a military “joint-use” presence.

Table 3. Number of civil airports (Part 139-certificated and General Aviation) and military 

airbases requesting assistance from USDA-APHIS-Wildlife Services for wildlife hazard issues, 

FY 2018.

Airport status

Number (%) of airports 

requesting assistance

Civil: Part 139-certificateda, b 410 (46)

Civil: General Aviation 333 (40)

Military 129 (14)

Total 872 (100)

a The U.S. Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR Part 139) requires the Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA) to issue airport operating certificates to airports that serve scheduled and 

unscheduled air carrier aircraft with more than 9 seats or that the FAA Administrator requires to 

have a certificate. Part 139-certificated airports experiencing hazardous wildlife conditions as 

defined in Part 139.337 must conduct formal Wildlife Hazard Assessments and develop Wildlife 

Hazard Management Plans as part of the certification standards. In December 2018, there were

526 Part 139-certificated airports in the USA (FAA 2019b). 

b One of the 129 military airbases held a Part 139 certificate.
USDA-APHIS-Wildlife Services Assistance at Airports, FY2018—Begier, Dolbeer, & Washburn 11

For Public Distribution

Table 4. Number of passenger enplanements and aircraft movements in 2018 (FAA 2019a) at 

410 Part 139-certificated civil airports and 333 non-certificated (General Aviation) civil airports

in USA requesting assistance from USDA-APHIS-Wildlife Services for wildlife hazard issues, 

FY 2018.

Aircraft movements (departures and arrivals)

Airport status

(14 CFR 

Part 139)

Number of 

passenger 

enplanements

CommercialaGeneral 

aviationb Militaryc Total

Part-139-

certificated (410) 761,970,857 19,641,342 13,139,668 2,128,758 34,909,768

Noncertificated (354) 99,946 616,929 10,497,882 610,968 11,725,779

Total 762,070,803 20,258,271 23,637,550 2,739,726 46,635,547

a Air carrier, air taxi and commuter aircraft.

b

Includes itinerate (take off and land at different airport) and local (take off and land at same 

airport) movements.

c Totals exclude over 2 million military and civil aircraft movements at 129 military airbases.
USDA-APHIS-Wildlife Services Assistance at Airports, FY2018—Begier, Dolbeer, & Washburn 12

For Public Distribution

Table 5. Types of technical and operational (direct management) assistance provided by USDAAPHIS-Wildlife Services biologists to reduce wildlife hazards at airports, FY 2018. 

Category of 

assistance Type of assistance to reduce wildlife hazards

Number

of 

airports

% of total 

airports 

assisted 

(N = 872)

Technical Consultation regarding wildlife issues 801 92

Training of airport personnel 417a48

Wildlife Hazard Management Plan 205 24

Wildlife Hazard Assessment 116b13

Environmental Assessment 88 10

Total airports with Technical Assistance 829 95

Direct management Lethal control of hazardous wildlife 346 40

Non-lethal dispersal of hazardous wildlife 321 37

Habitat modification 263 30

Live-trap/ translocate wildlife from airport 238 27

Total airports with Direct Management 

Assistance 428 49

Off-airportc Total airports with off-airport Technical or 

Direct Management Assistance 184 21

a Number of airports where training took place; personnel from additional airports attended some 

of these training courses (See Table 6).

b This includes some airports where Wildlife Hazard Assessments (WHA) have been completed 

but monitoring of wildlife is being done continuously under a WHA protocol to maintain the 

WHA in a current state.

c FAA Advisory Circular 150/5200-33b “Hazardous wildlife attractants on or near airports” 

provides guidance on land uses that have the potential to attract hazardous wildlife within 10,000 

feet of runways and within the flight paths of arriving and departing aircraft within 5 miles of 

runways (FAA 2019c).
USDA-APHIS-Wildlife Services Assistance at Airports, FY2018—Begier, Dolbeer, & Washburn 13

For Public Distribution

Table 6. Number of airports where technical training was provided in the identification and 

management of wildlife hazards to aviation and total airport personnel trained by USDA-APHISWildlife Services biologists, FY 2018. 

State

Number 

of 

airports

Number of 

persons 

trained State

Number 

of 

airports

Number of 

persons 

trained

AK 33 189 ND 11 54

AL 3 50 NE 10 51

AR 0 0 NH 2 35

AZ 3 46 NJ 1 15

CA 22 368 NM 0 0

CO 17 289 NV 3 125

CT 5 30 NY 6 112

DE 0 0 OH 13 55

FL 0 0 OK 2 34

GA 3 23 OR 5 65

GU 4 142 PA 10 242

HI 14 198 PR 3 92

IA 9 51 RI 1 5

ID 5 58 SC 4 42

IL 26 180 SD 0 0

IN 10 71 TN 7 70

KS 8 75 TX 16 240

KY 1 6 USVI 0 0

LA 3 95 UT 8 46

MA 5 56 VA 10 169

MD 2 28 VT 6 22

ME 8 69 WA 16 694

MI 18 74 WI 9 96

MN 6 54 WV 6 80

MO 12 110 WY 8 51

MS 6 51 Mil-Fgna 7 97

MT 8 64

NC 22 91 Total 417b 4,960c

a U.S. military airbases at foreign locations.

b Personnel from several airports sometimes attended training courses provided by WS at an 

airport; thus, total airports from which personnel received training is greater than indicated. 

c See Figure 3 for trends in number of airports where training was conducted and number of 

airport personnel trained, 2002 - 2018. 
USDA-APHIS-Wildlife Services Assistance at Airports, FY2018—Begier, Dolbeer, & Washburn 14

For Public Distribution

Table 7. Number of Part 139-certificated airports, non-certificated airports, and military airbases at

which technical or direct management assistance by USDA-APHIS-Wildlife Services (WS) biologists 

resulted in an estimated reduction, suppression, or prevention of hazardous conditions caused by 

wildlife, FY 2018. 

Number of airports (% of total airports assisted)

Part 139-

certificated civil 

airports 

(n = 410a)

Noncertificated 

civil airports 

(n = 333b)

Military 

airbases

(n = 129)

All 

airports 

(n = 872)

Reduction of hazards from 

target wildlife species c 

259 (63) 204 (57) 104 (83) 567 (64)

Suppression of hazards from 

target wildlife species d 264 (64) 178 (50) 102 (82) 544 (61)

Prevention of hazards from 

target wildlife species e 230 (56) 157 (44) 94 (75) 481 (54)

Reduction, suppression, or 

prevention of hazards from 

target wildlife

283 (69) 209 (59) 105 (84) 597 (67)f, g

a

In addition, 1 of the 129 military airbases held a Part 139 certificate.

b General Aviation airports.

c As examples, airport installed anti-perching devices or removed vegetation attractive to hazardous 

wildlife because of WS recommendation; WS successfully initiated program to remove hazardous 

wildlife from the airport. 

d Successful WS direct management activities or technical assistance recommendations initiated in 

previous years were continued or maintained in 2018 (e.g., continued management of vegetation, 

continued removal of deer as a follow-up to more extensive removal initiated in earlier year to initially 

get problem under control).

e WS recommendation or intervention resulted in prevention of development or activity that would 

have resulted in increased wildlife numbers at airport (e.g., prevention of on-airport wetland 

mitigation, landfill expansion near airport, or planting of landscape vegetation attractive to wildlife).

f These estimates of successful intervention are conservative because WS biologists indicted that there 

was insufficient time since management actions had been implemented or insufficient information 

from airport personnel to assess whether or not hazards had been reduced, suppressed, or prevented on 

at least 50 airports.

g See Figure 4 for trends in the reduction, suppression, or prevention of hazards from target wildlife at 

airports served by WS, 2002-2018.
USDA-APHIS-Wildlife Services Assistance at Airports, FY2018—Begier, Dolbeer, & Washburn 15

For Public Distribution

Table 8. Sponsors for science-based activities by USDA-APHIS-Wildlife Services (WS) to 

support technical and direct management assistance efforts at airports and within the broader 

aviation industry to mitigate wildlife risks to aviation, FY 2018.

WS program Primary activities Sponsors

a

Operations  Managed the National Wildlife Strike Database and produced 

annual strike report summarizing data from 1990-2016,

 Participated in various outreach programs within aviation 

industry to promote the accurate reporting of wildlife strikes, 

 Worked with Commercial Aviation Safety Team (CAST) to 

monitor trends in high-risk strikes (Dolbeer 2016) and to update 

CAST concerning USDA WS NWRC activities related to 

NTSB recommendation A-10-87,

 Collaborated with the U.S. Air Force (USAF) Safety Center to 

establish a training program to augment “Site Assist Visits” at 

USAF domestic and international locations,

 Worked with USAF Safety Center, U.S. Navy, the Air National 

Guard and USDA WS NWRC to prioritize research projects 

related to airport wildlife hazards.

FAA/USN/

USAF/ANG/

USAFSC

Researchb

 Aircraft lighting to increase visibility of aircraft to birds, 

 Movement patterns of raptors and other birds near airports, 

 Understanding bird behavior in response to oncoming aircraft,

 Evaluation of alternative land covers to mitigate strike risk and 

reduce maintenance costs for airports,

 Identifying landscape-level bird attractants near airports,

 Evaluating unmanned aerial systems as bird hazing tools,

 Movement patterns of red-tailed hawks and other birds 

following translocation from airports.

FAA/DoD/

ESTCP

a Air National Guard (ANG); Department of Defense (DoD); Environmental Security Technology 

Certification Program (ESTCP); Federal Aviation Administration (FAA); U.S. Air Force (USAF);

U.S. Air Force Safety Center (USAFSC), U.S. Navy (USN).

b Research directed by the National Wildlife Research Center, Ohio Field Station, Sandusky, Ohio.
USDA-APHIS-Wildlife Services Assistance at Airports, FY2018—Begier, Dolbeer, & Washburn 16

For Public Distribution

Figure 1. Airports assisted by USDA-APHIS-Wildlife Services (WS) in provision of technical 

and direct management assistance to reduce wildlife hazards, 1990 - 2018. In 2018, WS personnel

provided 298 staff-years of assistance at 872 airports (743 civil, 129 military) in all 50 U.S. States, 

4 U.S. Territories, and 15 foreign countries (see Table 1). In addition, WS provided research and 

technical services to the Federal Aviation Administration and other agencies in 2018 to mitigate 

wildlife hazards to aviation nationwide (see Table 8).

Data 

unavai

lable, 

1991-

1997
USDA-APHIS-Wildlife Services Assistance at Airports, FY2018—Begier, Dolbeer, & Washburn 17

For Public Distribution

Figure 2. The number of staff years by USDA-APHIS-Wildlife Services personnel in provision 

of technical and direct management assistance to reduce wildlife hazards at civil and military 

airports increased from <1 in 1990 (primarily 1-day site visits or telephone consultations) to 100 

in 2001 and 298-300 in 2017 - 2018.

Figure 3. The number of airport personnel trained by USDA-APHIS-Wildlife Services in 

identification and management of wildlife hazards to aviation and the number of airports where 

training took place, 2001 to 2018 (see Table 6).

Data 

unavai

lable, 

1991-

2000
USDA-APHIS-Wildlife Services Assistance at Airports, FY2018—Begier, Dolbeer, & Washburn 18

For Public Distribution

Figure 4. Number of airports and military airbases at which technical or direct management 

assistance by USDA-APHIS-Wildlife Services (WS) biologists resulted in an estimated 

reduction, suppression, or prevention of hazardous conditions caused by wildlife, 2002 - 2018. 

These estimates of successful intervention are conservative because WS biologists indicted that 

there was insufficient time since management actions had been implemented or insufficient 

information from airport personnel to assess whether or not hazards had been reduced, 

suppressed, or prevented on 40 to 60 airports each year (see Table 7).