AMA News: Flying Site Assistance-2007/04

WE ARE always searching for proof that
model airplane flying affects wildlife. When I
have confronted members of the U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service, I’ve been told that
model airplanes do affect fish and wildlife,
and when I asked for scientific proof, all I
have experienced is deaf ears. I need your
help and ask that members contact me with
knowledge of any sort about the subject.
During the recovery period for permission
to fly at the former Galesville Military
Airstrip in Shawangunk, New York, that had
been taken over by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, I contacted Dr. Patrick T. Redig in
The Raptor Center at the University of
Minnesota.
He graciously responded with the
following letter to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service which addressed the issue. I want to
share that letter. I trust you will find it
informative.
“This letter is written in response to the
extended comment period on the draft
Compatibility Determination [CD] for the
conduct of model aviation activities at
Shawangunk Grassland National Wildlife
Refuge.
“I feel particularly able to comment on
this issue owing to my 35-plus years of
involvement in model aviation as well as a
professional career in endangered species
management, conservation, and veterinary
activities addressing conservation issues. I
have also practiced falconry for most of those
years and have a deep understanding and
firsthand knowledge of the response of many
different types of prey species to perceived
overhead threats (i.e. soaring raptors).
“My wildlife experience involves
undergraduate training in wildlife
management, teaching animal behavior in
veterinary curricula, providing medical care
to more than 14,000 raptors, coordinating the
restoration of the peregrine falcon to the
Midwestern section of the United States,
addressing toxicological and humandisturbance
issues involving bald eagles, and
collaborated on field work on migrating
ospreys using radio-satellite telemetry, to
mention a few.
“I am a professor at the University of
Minnesota College of Veterinary Medicine,
specializing in avian medicine, surgery, and
conservation, and also a member of the
Conservation Biology graduate faculty at that
same University.
“I have also flown radio-controlled
aircraft in areas where we shared both the air
and ground space with a variety of avian
species ranging from galliformes to
passeriformes to falconiformes and have
firsthand observations to back my assertions
regarding the impact of model flying
activities on these birds.
“Lastly, I have piloted full-scale aircraft
on eagle and peregrine falcon surveys in
Minnesota, Wisconsin, and Greenland, and
have been the biologist/observer in
helicopters hovering within 20 meters of an
incubating peregrine falcon that would not
budge despite the disturbance.
“I have also witnessed a radio-controlled
flying site used by our club for 30 years that
had an abundance of wildlife present, that
was taken over and converted in the short
span of four years to a massive townhouse
and condo development and is now
completely devoid of wildlife.
“For those of us concerned with
environmental preservation, there are much
greater threats than the relatively benign use
of open grasslands by model aviators.
“I find the CD to have a strong negative
bias in the review of biology, a
misrepresentation of the nature of modeling
activities, and a speculative overstatement of
the possible impact of modeling activities at
this site.
“The case may have more meritorious
consideration were it framed in the
perspective of preservation of a pristine area
for grassland, the value for which lies in its
preservation. But, we are talking about an old
airport with an 8,000-foot runway that has
been the subject of high levels of disturbanceprone
activities for decades—yet all that
notwithstanding, the area is still described as
‘one of the largest and most productive
grasslands in the Northeast’ (your letter to
Dave Brown, 26 November 2001).
“That being the case, I can in now
understand how the much less intense use of
this area by modelers would reverse this
situation.
“The section profiling the impact of
aircraft (full-scale based on references
provided) to model aircraft on avian species
(waterfowl in the cases cited) compared to
woodland and grassland species listed as
using this area is an apples-and-oranges
comparison and fails for a variety of reasons.
“The natural tendency of flocking birds
such as waterfowl (brandt, snow geese) is to
take to the air when threatened by a predator.
“I’ve witnessed this on numerous
occasions when a trained falcon is put in the
air half a mile away from a flock of several
thousand geese feeding in a corn field. As
soon as the falcon is visible above the tree
line, the geese take to the air enmasse. In
comparison, solitary grassland birds exhibit
the exact opposite response, hunkering down
and making themselves inconspicuous.
“With repeated exposure, they typically
habituate and demonstrate no response when
experience has shown the perceived threat
causes no harm. These birds live every
minute of their life dealing with the threat of
predators; an overhead object represents
nothing to them to which they are not
evolutionarily adapted. The statement that
piping plovers modified their behavior in
response to kite flying says nothing—they
modify their behavior to the rising and setting
of the sun too!
“And the statement that these activities
will result in birds fleeing the refuge is utterly
without merit. As long as food and cover is
present, they won’t. To wit, we have bald
eagles nesting on lakes in the Twin Cities
metro area that are continuously exposed to
fishing boats, sailboats, and waterskiers at
very close range—they’ve habituated.
“The fact that model airplanes are used at
airports to scare nuisance birds away is not
relevant, a) because they are not very
effective as the birds just move out of the
way and b) the planes are flown directly and
threateningly at the target birds—I know, I’ve
done it.
“The radio-controlled planes that would
be flown at this site are necessarily flown
with a range restricted by the visual acuity of
the pilots, probably going no more than 200
yards from either side of the pilot and
oriented down a flightline in the middle if the
field. All clubs require mufflers to attenuate
noise.
“The free-flight planes either have no
noise-producing source of power or, if they
do, the engine runs are restricted to periods of
a fraction of a minute, after which they
become quiet soaring objects, not different
from gulls or hawks. My experience and my
knowledge of birds says that none of these
activities will have serious or measurable
negative impact.
overrun at the end of the runway, kestrels
have landed and hunted from the racing
pylons, and one day last fall we suspended
flying activities for about 20 minutes while a
kettle of several hundred broad-winged
hawks passed over the field at a low altitude.
We’ve soared with red-tail [hawks] and
eagles, and have had peregrines take passing
shots at electric-powered gliders.
“Harriers hunt over the adjoining areas
and mourning doves and meadow larks
typically abound in the grasses adjoining the
runways.
“No, these are not detailed studies, but
they are more than casual observations also.
I’m more sensitive to land use and its impacts
on wildlife than most, and I do not see a
problem or incompatibility with model flying
and wildlife use of an open area.
“Model airplane club members
everywhere operate under a strict code of
regulations that is enforced by the club. And
my experience with aviators in general,
whether the massive convention of full-scale
enthusiasts at Oshkosh, Wisconsin, or
modelers at local flying fields, is a keen sense
of keeping things clean and picked up.
“You will never find so much as a scrap
of loose paper at any of these sites. At our
field, and I’m sure we’re not alone, you are
required to pick up and dispose of any pieces
remaining from a crashed airplane so that no
trace is left anywhere on the field.
“Through this mechanism of club rules
and the attendant peer-driven enforcement, it
would be possible to implement codes of
conduct and operation that would be
compatible with the essentials of model
flying and any concerns about maintaining
environmental protection. This cannot be said
for other users (hunters, bird watchers) who
come out on their own recognizance and are
in no way held accountable by others for their
actions.
“Indeed, the $16,640 identified as needed
for enforcement provided by the Service lies
not with the modelers, but rather with the
general public that otherwise uses the area.
So that cost along with the port-a-potty,
garbage pick-up, and other costs identified in
your budget exist whether modelers use this
area or not.
“Modelers everywhere value flying sites.
Consequently, they are responsible,
considerate, and agreeable to reasonable
limitations on use—more so than most of the
general public—and they take nothing for
granted.
“Given the historical use of this site by
modelers as well as a host of other much
more intrusive activities, the apparent health
of the wildlife despite this history of use, and
the negligable impact that modeling activities
have had, there has to be some compromise
situation that will allow this decommissioned
airport to be available to a broad cross-section
of the public, including modelers.
“There is a strong kinship between
aviators (especially free-flighters) and birds.
With a little imagination and cooperation, I
think they could become part of the
educational and interpretive process at the
refuge. I’ll bet they could demonstrate to the
public in real understandable terms why an
osprey has a high-aspect-ratio wing and a
red-tail a low-aspect-ratio wing and the
consequences this has for flying style, habitat
utilization, and prey preferences!
“Did you know that the wing of the
Spitfire was designed based on studies of the
wing shape of small passerines-like sparrows:
high lift, short takeoff, high maneuverability,
low stall speed?
“Let’s come out from behind the cloak of
pseudo-scientific gobbledy-gook and get
down to brass tacks with real people who
have an historical and genuine need to have a
place where they can enjoy their hobby—a
truly great pastime for young and old, capable
of bonding the generations, and yet be among
the least environmentally disturbing activities
engaging people in this day and age.
“Thank you very much for your
consideration of my comments.”