Disturb birds using foot patrols

Overall effectiveness category Unlikely to be beneficial
Number of studies: 2
Share Tweet Email

View assessment score

How is the evidence assessed?

Effectiveness

0%
Certainty

45%
Harms

0%

Calculating overall effectiveness category

Background information and definitions

Predation by birds at aquaculture facilities (e.g. fish ponds, raceways and shellfish farms) can cause significant commercial loss (Draulans 1987). With increasing protective wildlife legislation, demand for non-lethal, environmentally safe methods of bird exclusion and scaring have increased. Most fish farmers now rely primarily on non-lethal techniques to accomplish control (i.e. to reduce abundance or exclude fish-eating birds in and around the vicinity of fish farms). Control efforts may be optimized by compiling evidence relating to deterrent or exclusion device efficacy, taking into account costs, practicality of use and the possibility of developing integrated strategies (i.e. combining more than one deterrent method). Avian deterrents can be categorised as auditory, visual, chemical, exclusion, habitat modification and lethal (Bishop et al. 2003). Lethal deterrents are not considered here (except where, very rarely, used as part of an integrated approach).

Bishop, J., McKay, H., Parrott, D. & Allan, J. (2003) Review of international research literature regarding the effectiveness of auditory bird scaring techniques and potential alternatives. Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs.

Draulans, D. (1987) The effectiveness of attempts to reduce predation by fish-eating birds: a review. Biological Conservation, 41, 219–232.

Study locations

Key messages

Two replicated studies from Belgium and Australia found that using foot patrols to disturb birds from fish farms did not reduce the number of birds present or fish consumption.

About key messages

Key messages provide a descriptive index to studies we have found that test this intervention.

Studies are not directly comparable or of equal value. When making decisions based on this evidence, you should consider factors such as study size, study design, reported metrics and relevance of the study to your situation, rather than simply counting the number of studies that support a particular interpretation.

Supporting evidence from individual studies

A replicated study from Limburg, Belgium, over 49 nights in 1982-3 (Draulans & Van Vessem 1985), found that using foot patrols to disturb grey herons Ardea cinerea from 12 fish ponds did not necessarily reduce fish consumption. Low frequency disturbance (e.g. 3-5 farmer visits/night) caused a significant decrease in heron numbers but became less effective as heron numbers increased. Reduced numbers did not necessarily reduce fish consumption, as maximum predation occurred soon after bird arrival and disturbance mostly discouraged only well-fed birds from returning.
Study and other actions tested
Referenced paper
Draulans D. & Van Vessem J. (1985) The effect of disturbance on nocturnal abundance and behaviour of grey herons (Ardea cinerea) at a fish-farm in winter. Journal of Applied Ecology, 22, 19-27.
A replicated trial in New South Wales, Australia (Rowland 1995), found that hanging gill nets in fish ponds and using harassment patrols to deter cormorants Phalacrocorax spp. from fish farms was not effective. This study is discussed in ‘Use in-water devices to reduce fish loss from ponds’.
Study and other actions tested
Referenced paper
Rowland S.J. (1995) Predation of Bidyanus bidyanus (Teraponidae) in ponds by cormorants. The Progressive Fish-Culturist, 57, 248-249.

Please cite as:

Williams, D.R., Child, M.F., Dicks, L.V., Ockendon, N., Pople, R.G., Showler, D.A., Walsh, J.C., zu Ermgassen, E.K.H.J. & Sutherland, W.J. (2020) Bird Conservation. Pages 137-281 in: W.J. Sutherland, L.V. Dicks, S.O. Petrovan & R.K. Smith (eds) What Works in Conservation 2020. Open Book Publishers, Cambridge, UK.

Where has this evidence come from?

List of journals searched by synopsis

All the journals searched for all synopses

This Action forms part of the Action Synopsis:

Bird Conservation

Related Actions

Actions	Effectiveness	Studies	Category
Deter birds from landing on shellfish culture gear using spikes on oyster cages Action Link	Likely to be beneficial	1	Synopsis Link
Use ‘mussel socks’ to prevent birds from attacking shellfish Action Link	Likely to be beneficial	1	Synopsis Link
Provide refuges for fish within ponds Action Link	Likely to be beneficial	1	Synopsis Link