19 ms·
Growers Are Beaming Over the Success of Lasers to Stave Off Birds
- 21 8y agoLovely, after destroying their habitat, now we hunt them with lasers :)
- wincy 8y agoActually starlings are an invasive species in the United States. So “we” have done no such thing.
- DmenshunlAnlsis 8y agoActually starlings are an invasive species in the United States. Yes, but so are American humans. We’re hardly in a position to throw stones in that direction I think. Edit: My point seems to have flown past some, I am not in favor of lasering birds.
- rcMgD2BwE72F 8y agoWe brought them there. Do you think we discriminate between invasive and non invasive birds? "[The lasers are] running right now as we speak. You're out here in over 175 acres of blueberries," he says, punctuating the observation with a staccato of hand claps. "There's not one bird that you see flying around." We should tell them to feed elsewhere. Put a sign or something. If they don't comply, then we'll stress them out until they stop being thieves or go to die somewhere.
- ryanmarsh 8y agoEasy there fella. Keep that hyperbole pointed in a safe direction. Tell us how you really feel.
- rcMgD2BwE72F 8y agoSure. https://e360.yale.edu/digest/forty-percent-of-the-worlds-bird-populations-are-in-decline-new-study-finds https://e360.yale.edu/digest/forty-percent-of-the-worlds-bir... "Agriculture has the biggest impact of all human activities on birds, threatening 74 percent of the 1,469 species at risk of extinction." It's just laser. It's OK. Their retina doesn't seem to be affected. They just don't fly here anymore. Can you see a bird?
- dang 8y agoPlease post civilly and substantively, or not at all. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- mmirate 8y ago> Put a sign or something. Unfortunately, they can't read. (If they could, then that would imply them being intelligent enough to interact with humans in a civilized manner.) Otherwise, your last paragraph rings true at face value.
- maxwell 8y agoClassifying humans as invasive to particular regions is an interesting idea. I wonder how it would play out legally.
- komali2 8y agoIn every government I'm aware of, humans have the most power of Right compared to any other animal, so my expectation is "thrown out of whatever court you choose." Then again some countries maintain Nature Preserves and National Parks. Hm.
- schiffern 8y ago> In every government I'm aware of, humans have the most power of Right compared to any other animal But is a human's "right" to destroy the ecosystem (eg clearing and erecting buildings) superior to the entire forest's "right" not to be killed? As a counterpoint, Equador has enshrined Rights of Nature into their Constitution,[1] and ecosystems themselves can be plaintiffs in environmental suits brought on their behalf[2]. [1] http://therightsofnature.org/ecuador-rights/ http://therightsofnature.org/ecuador-rights/ [2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FzMpxG_he8k https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FzMpxG_he8k
- michaelmrose 8y agoA forest may be a valuable resource but we recognize its value in respect to us. Even when we recognize that a lot of value may be obtained by protecting it for its own sake we do so because we feel that we will ultimately benefit in the long run. Forests aren't individuals and talking about their rights is meaningless.
- SmellyGeekBoy 8y agoHumans only have rights because humans say we do.
- michaelmrose 8y ago
- stephengillie 8y agoTierZoo agrees with you. https://youtu.be/ImYu9dJM4kQ?t=6m44s https://youtu.be/ImYu9dJM4kQ?t=6m44s
- rcMgD2BwE72F 8y agoThieving Birds. "Thieving Birds". Who can write that in 2018? Seriously, what's wrong with mankind to not realize that we've become the biggest threat to life on Earth? Thieving Birds... https://www.dw.com/en/time-running-out-to-save-the-earths-plants-and-animals/a-43091288 https://www.dw.com/en/time-running-out-to-save-the-earths-pl...
- maxwell 8y agoHumans are a threat to biodiversity, but so are starlings: http://blogs.longwood.edu/kepleasants/2013/03/15/invasive-species/ http://blogs.longwood.edu/kepleasants/2013/03/15/invasive-sp...
- rcMgD2BwE72F 8y agoWho's to blame? Who brought them to the US? If these lasers are used to prevent these species from damaging the ecosystems, then OK. But AFAIK, it was never the intention to discriminate between invasive and non invasive species.
- devicenull 8y agohttps://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugene_Schieffelin https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugene_Schieffelin
- rcMgD2BwE72F 8y agoA human, again?!
- trukterious 8y agoYet some humans try to save other species. No other species does that.
- rcMgD2BwE72F 8y agoI was reading the Wikipedia article about "The road to hell is paved with good intentions", which I found after translating the idiom from my native language. I wanted to make sure you'd understand the quote but guess what? Here's the first sentence of the first section (Meaning): >A common interpretation of the saying is that wrongdoings or evil actions are often masked by good intentions; or even that good intentions, when acted upon, may have unintended consequences. A simple example is the introduction of an invasive species, like the Asian carp, which has become a nuisance due to unexpected proliferation and behaviour. Why do you think we are the only species that feel the need to save others? Have we ever tried to save one that wasn't threatened by the consequences of humans' wrongdoings? We act like we don't know what we're doing. Perhaps we should calm down and observe before destroying our fragile environment and rush to save it (often destroying it further in the process). Just. Calm. Down.
- dang 8y agoThis comment breaks several of the site guidelines, including the one that asks you not to post shallow dismissals, and the one the asks you to please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. "Someone" here applies to stories just as much as to comments. Also, the guidelines ask you not to snark. You may have a good underlying point, but if you'd please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and express your good underlying points more thoughtfully from now on, that would be much less destructive and we'd appreciate it.
- sometimesijust 8y agoI found those two guidelines ironic considering that calling something a shallow dismissal without making reference to the original argument is in itself a shallow dismissal that encourages weakening the interpretation of the strength of an argument. It only gets worse when you consider the case of domain experts giving concise commentary using domain specific language. Is an argument shallow if you don't understand it?
- JoeAltmaier 8y agoBirds will arrive the day before fruit is ripe, and the whole flock will strip the berries, trying each one and dropping the green ones on the ground looking for a ripe one. They can strip a tree in minutes. Why? If they waited a day, the whole flock could have ripe fruit. But its a flock, and any bird that waits just loses out to the ones that don't wait. Tragedy of the commons, played out in evolution.
- thomasahle 8y agoThere is an interesting article about Tragedy of the commons in evolutionary biology: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0169534707002741 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S016953470... There are multiple ways evolution tries to solve this, but it's hard. Insects are particularly good at it.
- zawerf 8y agoThe article is paywalled but it's a pretty plausible result of group selection. The self-interested birds will force out the cooperative birds at first, but they are naturally self-limiting by cutting off their own resources. On the other hand the cooperative birds can ensure that their entire species grow quickly, eventually covering areas that selfish birds haven't reached. In an alternate universe the cooperative birds might even evolve a "moral" behavior where they actively gang up on and punish cheaters who eat unripe fruits.
- JoeAltmaier 8y agoI believe because the entire 'flock' has to adopt the same cooperative behavior for it to work. Insects are more genetically uniform.
- rossdavidh 8y agoBut, also, if they waited the farmer might take the crop. From the point of view of the bird, not-quite-ripe fruit is nearly as good, nutrition-wise. So, not really a "tragedy".
- 8y ago
- walterbell 8y ago> Researchers at Purdue University are studying the risk of injury to birds. Principal investigator Esteban Fernandez-Juricic says very little is known about whether lasers can harm the animals' retinas. "What we are trying to assess is whether different levels of energy output of these lasers and different levels of exposure time could cause any kind of retinal injury on the animal," Fernandez-Juricic says. "These retinal injuries could potentially be pretty serious and affect the ability of the animal to see and consequently to find food, mates or refuge." In a separate study about seabirds and lasers, https://wsg.washington.edu/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/SBWG7_Inf_12-Laser-trials-N-Pacific-MELVIN-et-al_E_s_f.pdf https://wsg.washington.edu/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/SBWG... > Attending seabirds (all species) showed little detectable response to the laser beam during daylight hours. At night however, Northern fulmars (Fulmarus glacialis) showed a transient and localized response at lower vessel speeds (3.5 kts) while feeding in the offal plume. In contrast, gulls in flight at nighttime in pursuit of the vessel showed a strong aversion at higher vessels speeds (11 kts). These results suggest that laser beam detection by birds may be more challenging at high light levels. The implication is that lasers might be modified to increase its visual contrast during the day. From these field trials, lasers appear more likely to scare birds from an abundant food source at low light levels and success may be species and condition specific.
- wyldfire 8y agoI suppose I might be a little naive, I assumed this use of lasers might be as a weapon but the lasers are "merely" used like a scarecrow. [though the article points out that some scientists will analyze whether this does harm to the birds]. The article points out that this is actually more humane than poisons or guns (which are presumably among previous technologies used to protect the crop).
- mmirate 8y agoThanks for saving me a click; I was about to get very interested in how they would have solved the inherent energy-efficiency problems of that route. Guess we'll have to wait another decade or two for accurate direct-fire air defense systems. :(
- trukterious 8y agoBird-herding by drone is another potentially emerging technology: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17707305 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17707305
- tomcam 8y agoWe have blueberries planted at home but the deer always get them first. We’ve just come to regard this as a cheap form of entertainment. We also grow Rainier cherries, but birds spike them with amazing accuracy. They divebomb the tree and somehow spear only the cleanest, freshest, best part of the cherry on their way down. It is impressively accurate work at very high speed.
- itronitron 8y agocan't you tie little rings around the birds necks so they drop the cherries for you?
- rootw0rm 8y agowe grew berries (blackberries, raspberries, loganberries) when I was a kid, but our doberman would always pick the ripe berries before anyone could get to them. she'd peel her lips back and use just her front teeth to pick them and avoid the thorns.
- rossdavidh 8y agoSo, in the case of literal scarecrows, any bird that is naturally less frightened by the scarecrow will be at a disadvantage because they will also be slower to get spooked by the actual farmer (this only worked when scarecrows were dressed in similar clothes to actual farmers, who would periodically come out with a rifle and kill a few birds). In the case of the laser, I don't see the downside for the birds that decide to ignore the laser, and they get extra food, hence more offspring next year. I would not be surprised if this stopped working in 5 years or so.
- huhtenberg 8y agoMakes you wonder how long it will take for the birds to adapt... and adapt they probably will.
- sampo 8y agoI'd guess 5-10 generations at the minimum.
- scalablenotions 8y agoHeadlines 10 years from now: "Scientists mystified by 'bird blindness' colony collapse" "Laser manufacturers found to be spending millions on lobbyist groups"
- justicezyx 8y agoParticularly put down by this type of comments. Such comments are pure negative addition, not adding any value in terms of solving the problem. It's not even clear if this is a problem: "very little is known about whether lasers can harm the animals' retinas." The sentiment of this type of comments are also predominantly one-sided, which always is the most important property of any failed attempts of solving any non-trivial large-scale problems.
- rcMgD2BwE72F 8y agoIt's like an invitation to the precautionary principle. "When the occurrence of any damage, albeit unpredictable in the current state of scientific knowledge, may seriously and irreversibly harm the environment, public authorities shall, with due respect for the principle of precaution and the areas within their jurisdiction, ensure the implementation of procedures for risk assessment and the adoption of temporary measures commensurate with the risk involved in order to preclude the occurrence of such damage" I like it.
- ceejayoz 8y ago> It's not even clear if this is a problem: "very little is known about whether lasers can harm the animals' retinas." It's not clear it's not a problem, either. As you cite, we don't know either way yet. "Let's be careful mucking with an ecosystem" isn't negative, and there's a lot of historical evidence such caution is necessary.
- Godel_unicode 8y agoI think this fails the base rate fallacy test; there are lots of times when mucking with an ecosystem hasn't caused problems, but nobody talks about those.
- rmason 8y agoWhen I worked in the fertilizer business both the partners were berry growers. Literally when they figured out their cost of production they allowed for the 'bird's share' of the crop. They tried sound machines, scare crows and air cannons with nothing working very well. They would have been absolutely delighted to have been able to use lasers to deny the birds their share of the crop.
- st26 8y agoThe irony being, entirely possible the birds are providing valuable services in the form of pest control. In other words, maybe they really do deserve a share, & everyone is the better off for it.
- Scaevolus 8y agoA swarm of 3000 starlings descending in the days before the farmers pick the berries probably aren't providing much pest control.
- GW150914 8y agoMaybe not for the farmer, but how about the general region? What we don’t know about complex interconnects in ecosystems could fill volumes, but we still are happy to disrupt that system for profit. Sometimes we try to disrupt it for seemingly good reasons, like reducing the impact of a disease by killing vectors, only later to discover said vector was also a pollinator. We’re just too ignorant to be trusted with levers of questionable power over such a complex system. @vvanders: I hate to break it to you, but raspberries aren’t native to the Americas either. Calling one species invasive while ignoring the plethora of other species which have no significant history in a place is just a word game. In fact raspberries can be classed as invasive, but so what? Raspberries got about a 100 year head start on the starling, so they’re grandfathered in? Feh.
- pavel_lishin 8y agoI would hope and assume that the starlings can and have survived without the rich pickings of farmers' fields.
- bobthepanda 8y agoWould this have a terrible effect on insect populations as well? The Four Pests Campaign of the Great Leap Forward targeted the sparrow, amongst other animals, because they ate grain. Turns out they also ate a lot of insects, so when the sparrows all died the locusts came in and killed the harvest. These lasers don't kill, but permanently scaring them away from fields could have a similar effect. https://io9.gizmodo.com/5927112/chinas-worst-self-inflicted-disaster-the-campaign-to-wipe-out-the-common-sparrow https://io9.gizmodo.com/5927112/chinas-worst-self-inflicted-...
- Paul-ish 8y agoThe advantage here is you can turn the lasers on right before the harvest (when the birds do damage), but otherwise leave them off and the birds can return.
- neaanopri 8y agoBut, if the birds derive a significant portion of their yearly calories from eating berries during the harvest, you will still do damage to bird populations. Also, an open berry field keeps birds nearby. If the birds can't eat the berries, then what incentive do they have to stick around and eat harmful insects? I'm not necessarily against the bird-lasers, but it's worth considering their side effects.
- frozenport 8y agoHarmful insects are their normal food.
- melq 8y agoThe blueberries are only there because the farmer is planting them in the first place. Though I agree with your sentiment.
- nerpderp83 8y agoI work on a system that strives for 100% efficiency, I think it makes the it extremely fragile. Loss is also tolerance for upset. It might be cheaper to produce more and not implement this system at all. Innovation comes from increase the size of the solution universe over micro optimizations.
- solarkraft 8y agoSide note: The plain text site you're served when you disagree with data collection is very nice.
- cjg 8y agoNot sure why you can't have a bit of CSS just because you don't want your data collected.
- visarga 8y ago> Growers Are Beaming Over the Success of Lasers to Stave Off Birds Once every 10 years there comes a moment when you can use "beaming" with this sense. Funny how they couldn't help using it. I had to read twice to make sure who's beaming lasers over the success.
- rjplatte 8y agoI came for the pun
- tinbad 8y agoThis is completely off topic but the headline made me immediately think of this: https://youtu.be/TGkPMZxWPpA https://youtu.be/TGkPMZxWPpA Since most here are not Dutch it requires a bit of explanation , this was a parody video made in the early 2000’s of the countless “QVC” style info/commercials that used to be aired during the day or late at night on dutch television to fill airtime. They would take some b-grade TV products from US (and possibly other countries) and just poorly dub it over for the Dutch market, often by the same guy. These “Tellsell” (which I believe was the actual name of the company) commercials everyone would know about and sometimes joke about the crappy products and commercial style. This parody has all the typical cliches of these commercials like every time the name of the product was mentioned it would be extra sloooow and disadvantages of “alternative” products exaggerated to comical extremes. I believe this video came out before YouTube was mainstream, and circulated on USB drives and shared on LAN parties. Ahh the old times (when not every piece of content ever made was instantly available).
- jcoffland 8y ago> ...lasers can burn your eyes if you look into them. It's the same danger as pilots being blinded by irresponsible people aiming laser pointers into the sky. It's worth noting that there are no records of ground based lasers causing damage to a pilot's eyes or causing an aviation accident. Not that it's a good idea to point lasers at airplanes.
- Dylan16807 8y agoI don't know why you're getting downvoted. A laser pointer (limited to 5mW) isn't capable of causing eye damage anywhere past 50 feet. Even a big 500mW laser is causing no damage past 500 feet. They can distract for miles, but that's not the same thing at all.
- SmellyGeekBoy 8y agoI presume by "blinded" they mean temporary blindness due to losing their night vision, not permanent damage. The reason they don't cause accidents is because they generally happen on approach or departure which are (or can be) fully automated and therefore easy to abort. It's still very unpleasant for the pilot.
- Dylan16807 8y ago> I presume by "blinded" they mean temporary blindness due to losing their night vision, not permanent damage. It says "burn your eyes" so I don't interpret it that way. > The reason they don't cause accidents is because they generally happen on approach or departure which are (or can be) fully automated and therefore easy to abort. If you're not on approach or departure, what kind of accident would even happen? Especially when even a total loss of external vision still leaves you with all your instruments.
- iamleppert 8y agoLol @ the thought of threat to the bird’s eyes. An average beam is a few mm across, and divergence quickly spreads the beam to trivial power. It would probably happen once in awhile, but it would be incredibly rare to catch one right in the eye. Add to that fact the birds seem scared away so it makes it even more unlikely.
- gok 8y agoOh great now nature is going to adapt with laser-resistant birds!
- mianos 8y agoBirds that can fly blind? They call them bats. They use echolocation. Some species also like berries.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- xmichael999 8y agoWhere can I buy such a laser? My yard is always covered in birds, and at least twice a week birds get caught in my house (very open design). I would love love love to be able to keep them away harm free.
- SmellyGeekBoy 8y agoI've seen gardeners hanging old CDs up to achieve a similar effect. Apparently the way they swing around and glint in the sunlight deters birds.
- mrfusion 8y agoThey don’t explain how the lasers repel the birds. Especially in the day you’d they wouldn’t notice green dots on a green background and it doesn’t seem like that would scare them.
- sarabande 8y agoThe implication seems to be that the birds can see the dots in the daytime, although we can't: > They also work during the daytime. But in sunlight, the human eye can only see green dots dancing across the berry-laden bushes.
- cjg 8y ago> although we can't The quote says we can. Perhaps just the dots is enough to deter them.
- tzs 8y agoI have a nice and bright green laser (10 mW) and I get plenty of birds (I put out grain, seeds, and peanuts on my deck railing to attract birds and squirrels), so some experimentation is called for. There is a Dark-Eyed Junco [1] on the railing of my deck eating right now. I put a green jiggling spot right on the railing in front of him on and near the seeds he was taking...no reaction. I send the beam through the air in front of him...no reaction. I was not able to find anything that got a reaction from him. I didn't try putting the spot on him, such as on his foot, because I didn't want to get close enough to risk an eye shot. Unfortunately, it is close enough to sunset and it is cloudy today further darkening things, so it looks like I'm not going to get anything other than that Junco. Everything else seems to have decided it is time to bed down. Too bad...on a sunny day I'd have some Steller's Jays [2] around at this time, and I'm really curious to see what they think about the laser. I'm particularly interested in comparing the Steller's Jays, and also the crows that often come by, to small birds like the Junco, and also the Chickadees and assorted types of Sparrows, because I've already observed interesting behavior differences between the bigger birds in general and the small birds. The Jays and the crows are corvids. They are among the smartest birds. I had expected when I started putting out food for these, especially the crows (which are known to be able to easily learn to recognize individual humans and learn which humans are threats and which are not) to quickly learn that I'm not a threat. In fact, I was worried that they might end up learning to beg for food. I had expected the little birds, on the other hand, to always see me as a threat. In fact, it seems to be the opposite. After about 10 months of feeding, the crows still will not come anywhere near if I'm outside on the deck. If they are there eating and I start to come out they immediately fly away. They have seen me come out and put out food. They have never seen me aggressive to any bird (or other animal). Heck, they have seen me let squirrels come and take peanuts from my hand, and seen my hold out a hand of seeds for small birds to land on eat from. The Steller's Jays are only slightly more accepting than the crows. They immediately leave if I start to come outside, but if I stay outside, but a couple meters away from where the in-shell peanuts are on the rail, they will fly in, quickly grab one peanut, and fly away. (If I'm inside, they pick up and put down several peanuts, apparently judging by weight which are the most worthwhile, and then take the best--or take two if there is also a smaller one that they can stuff in first leaving room to also carry one). The little birds, though, after only a few weeks or so of my regularly putting out food, would come and start eating while I was still putting out food. They had no problem landing and eating newly placed food less than a meter from where I was currently placing food. These little guys, the Chestnut-backed Chickadees [3], went even farther. Their favorite of what I put out seems to be out-of-shell peanuts (these birds are too small to deal with in-shell peanuts). If I had put put seeds and grain already, but not yet peanuts, I found I could hold out a palm full of out-of-shell peanuts and the Chestnut-backed Chickadees would actually fly over, land on my fingers, pick out a peanut, and leave [4]. They also would sometimes fly over to me when I came out the door, and hover near my hands--I'm guessing looking to see if I've got food for them. (It's only the Chestnut-backed Chickadees that do this. I also get Black-capped Chickadees, a couple different kinds of Nuthaches, and some other birds of about that same size, and none of them got past the "will eat a meter away" stage). [1] https://www.allaboutbirds.org/guide/Dark-eyed_Junco/id https://www.allaboutbirds.org/guide/Dark-eyed_Junco/id [2] https://www.allaboutbirds.org/guide/Stellers_Jay/id https://www.allaboutbirds.org/guide/Stellers_Jay/id [3] https://www.allaboutbirds.org/guide/Chestnut-backed_Chickadee/overview https://www.allaboutbirds.org/guide/Chestnut-backed_Chickade... [4] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ShPgZhSbxU0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ShPgZhSbxU0
- Sniffnoy 8y agoSo just how effective is this? What's the resulting yield compared to without it?
- chisleu 8y agonext, make it kill insects but not blind people when the ML goes wonky and it shoots a kid in the eye
- Eric_WVGG 8y agoA Microsoft CTO is working on it https://www.ted.com/talks/nathan_myhrvold_could_this_laser_zap_malaria/transcript?language=en https://www.ted.com/talks/nathan_myhrvold_could_this_laser_z...
- FrozenVoid 8y agoOne of advantages of greenhouses and vertical indoor farming is removing pest/weed/animal access.
- rootw0rm 8y agoyup, that's what all the cannabis growers out here in Cali say!
- oliwarner 8y agoI have a tiny amount of experience in bird control. Birds are devious. I don't mean evil. They're completely amoral, but they're clever. They'll work out what's going on in order to get their food. Things that might take an insect multiple generations to work out and adapt to, a bird might spend a day or a week on. In the decade I've been shooting, I've seen many countermeasures (and lures) come and go. Scarecrows consistently fail now. Propane cannons just annoy residents. The birds adapt swiftly because their lives depend on it. That is all to say, lasers won't last. I'd be surprised if they work for longer than a few seasons before the birds are simply used to them. The silly thing is we know why this is an issue. Intensive farming, outrageous field size, the removal of hedgerows and the removal of predator habitats (mature trees) have all meant massive colonies of pigeons and starlings can exist. If you want to start peddling this back you have to reintroduce the natural controls that used to keep things in check.
- dsfyu404ed 8y agoJust crank up the power on the lasers until they remove the offending birds from the gene pool. The birds will figure out not to eat the crops.
- oliwarner 8y agoThere's a colossal difference in the amount of power required to blind or even maim a bird and the amount required to humanely dispatch it. You're talking thousands of Watts and pinpoint focussing. It's just too expensive to park Navy grade laser weaponry on every field. By comparison this is cheapo clutch of laser pointers strapped to a whirly-gig and that already somehow commands $10k.
- mbaye 8y ago>"It's like someone waving a stick in your face," Ackermann says. "At some point, you're going to say, 'I'm not welcome here and I'm going to leave.'" Having worked a couple of summers in my youth at an apple and sweet cherry orchard, I find this quote comically naive.
- tribesman 8y agoRaining temporary glue on their feathers from a drone seems like a better option to me.
- jlebrech 8y agothey could keep their profit were they also a bird farm. they could recalibrate the laser for that task.
- tlear 8y agoLiving currently in Japan in somewhat rural area, lots of fruit growing around. I am not sure why but there are A LOT of hawks and other birds of prey around. I am guessing they are doing decent job controlling bird population. Other then that there are scarecrows that mimic bop sort of like kites. Also some people rig ventilators all around trees, spinning blades kill birds perhaps? Laser sounds really nice but they will need up the power to blind birds or they will just learn to ignore it. I am also really hoping for razor blade tipped ramming drones :)
- bigpicture 8y ago> I am also really hoping for razor blade tipped ramming drones In my high-rise neighborhood we have peregrine falcons. That's pretty much the same thing.