Int.J.Curr.Microbiol.App.

Sci (2019) 8(2): 1035-1039

International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences

ISSN: 2319-7706 Volume 8 Number 02 (2019)
Journal homepage: http://www.ijcmas.com

Review Article https://doi.org/10.20546/ijcmas.2019.802.121

Bird Repeller – A Review

S.S. Baral*, R. Swarnkar, A.V. Kothiya, A.M. Monpara and S.K. Chavda

Department of Farm Machinery and Power Engineering, College of Agricultural Engineering

& Technology, Anand Agricultural University, Godhra-389001, India

*Corresponding author

ABSTRACT

Keywords
All around the world, the birds are a major threat in the field of agriculture
Birds, Electronic
repeller, Control
causing damage to economic field crops, storage houses and also dirtying
and technique human life areas. These birds are control by practicing different
traditionally outdated method. But now a day’s with the change of
Article Info technology different electronic repeller are adapted for bird control in
Accepted: agricultural field. This study had been carried out to know the different
10 January 2019 electronic bird repellers are available and also the technique used in it is
Available Online: discussed.
10 February 2019

Introduction damaging cultivated crops. Population of

some of these birds, which are well adapted to
Birds are the most fascinating group in the live on agricultural crops, have increased
animal kingdom. They are an integral part of enormously in number and became pests.
all natural ecosystems and attract the attention Such bird species comprised mostly of
of laymen and scientists alike, because of granivorous and frugivorous birds such as
their interesting biological attributes and the pigeons, doves, parakeets, munias, sparrows,
significant role played by them in nature. As weaver birds etc. These birds are often
in natural ecosystems, often, many birds are labeled as pests and if their impact on
associated with agro-ecosystems for their agriculture is sufficient to inflict serious
survival and make some impact on such damage, their population becomes the target
systems. Subsequent to the change in land use of massive management or control efforts
pattern, which has often resulted in the loss of (Weins and Dyer, 1977).
natural habitats like forests, grasslands and
wetlands, many of the birds had to rely on Birds are one example of pests for farmers.
man-made habitats and agricultural crops. In Bird attacks are very much detrimental to
the process of procuring food, birds started farmers because the birds attacked in colonies

1035
 Int.J.Curr.Microbiol.App.Sci (2019) 8(2): 1035-1039

or groups in large numbers. A survey of the Physical bird deterrents include such products
New Zealand farmers by the nation’s Plant as steel or plastic spike systems, bird netting,
Protection Society, revealed that large electrified wire systems, non-electrified wire
percentage of them had encountered crop systems, electrified track systems, slope
damage from birds (Coleman and Spurr, barriers, mechanical spiders, chemical foggers
2001). and more. Sharp bird spikes can pierce and
impale birds, while "blocking" and
The most common domestic birds are pigeons "shocking" methods do not harm birds.
(Columba liviadomestica), sparrows (Passer Unfortunately, blunt tip bird spikes may still
domesticus), starlings (Sturnus vulgaris), impale birds on windy days. The safer
Common myna (Acridotheres tristis), Jungle shocking and blocking methods simply repel
myna (Acridotheres fuscus), crows (Corvus birds from an area with no harm. The Humane
splendens) and blackbirds (Turdus merula) in Society of the United States (HSUS)
India as well as in many countries in the recommends the use of bird netting, bird wire,
world (Summers, 1985; Saglem and Onemli, contraceptives and low-current electric
2005; Avery et al., 2005). These birds not barriers. (Anonymous)
only give damage to the agricultural area but
also make dirty the human life area. Chemical deterrents range from products for
turf to avicides. There are taste a version
In order to protect these areas against bird products for geese, and fogging agents used
damage, some studies about mechanical and for birds. Many localities have restrictions on
chemical fighting methods have been made the use of chemicals and pesticides targeted at
up to now. For instance, it was reported in the birds if they intend to kill them. Chemical
literatures that the effect of 50% deterrents that do not harm birds are widely
anthraquinone and 75% methiocarb, caffeine, used with limited results. (Anonymous)
garlic extract, physical barriers such as net or
acrylic fibres, distress calls of birds, human Electronic bird repeller
bird scarer and colored lights on birds were Bird repeller is the dispersal of birds using
studied (Bruggers and Ruelle, 1982; Vickery sound that makes them uncomfortable. A bird
and Summers, 1992; York et al., 2000; Avery repeller is any of a number devices designed
et al., 2005). to scare birds, usually employed by farmers to
dissuade birds from eating recently planted
Bird control is important because pest birds arable crops.
can create health-related problems through
their feces, including histoplasmosis, Electronic bird repellent devices produce
cryptococcosis, and psittacosis. extremely effective audio and visual threats
that frighten, irritate, and disorient birds,
Bird droppings may also cause damage to forcing them to seek calmer, untreated areas.
property and equipment. Birds also frequently They are also used on airfields to prevent
steal from crops and fruit orchards. Methods birds accumulating near runways and causing
of bird control include physical deterrents, a potential hazard to aircraft. Electronic bird
visual deterrents, multi-sensory deterrents, deterrents condition pest birds to stay away
sonic devices, trained birds of prey (falconry), from treated areas for good. In order to
chemicals, contraceptives and active barriers, protect these areas against bird damage, some
among others. electronic based mechanical methods are
adapted for control.

1036
 Int.J.Curr.Microbiol.App.Sci (2019) 8(2): 1035-1039

Salient features of electronic bird repeller amplifier increases the signal level (predators’
calls level) for loudspeaker. The working
Electronic Bird Repeller has many advantages voltage of battery, amplifier and speaker is
over a normal bird repeller. Some of the 12V, but the MP3 needs 1.5V. In order to
salient features are as follows: reduce the voltage from 12 to 1.5V for MP3, a
converter was used. The observations and
Easy installation: The installation of the analysis of the developed bird scarer was
repeller is instantaneous as well as repellant taken for evaluation and the following data
action. are noted down. Tests were arranged into 4
Power efficient: The device operates on a groups to determine the most effective
very small voltage equivalent to 12 volt predator’s call and speaker play and pause
thereby consumes less power and thus there periods. The most effective sound is the call
is no need to modify the circuit for extra from Falcon (Buteolagopus) when compared
separate power supply. with other predators and the best speaker play
Large coverage area: It cover large areas and pause periods are 60 second (1 minute)
where use of physical barriers or visual and 360 second (6 minute), respectively.
scares may not be ideal.
Compactness: The device uses few IC’s and Suryawanshi (2013) designed and tested of a
other electronic components and can be solar powered audible bird scarer and studied
packed compactly so that its size becomes various sound ranges used in it. The bird
small and can be kept anywhere making it scarer consists of photovoltaic (PV) panel,
portable in nature. dry-cell battery, converter, MP3 player,
Simple and elegant circuit design: The amplifier and a loudspeaker. It is said that the
circuit is simply made so that mass sound are coming from choosing the ideal
production can be easily done. Any damage predator’s call, loudspeaker play, and scarer
to the circuit can be easily repairable. camouflage. In addition, it was seen that
Less maintenance: It is long-lasting and during tests that birds try to see the speaker
little maintenance is required. when it play to be sure that it is real predator
Eco-friendly: It doesn’t produce any smoke, or any other artificial material before moving
gases and radiation and even the sound is not away. Out of the 22 sounds, the sound from
audible to human ear. So it is totally Falcon (Buteolagopus) was seen most
harmless and thus eco-friendly in nature. effective. Camouflage of bird scarer, sound
quality and volume was seen important on
Design of electronic bird repeller crows. The performance of the scarer depends
on the climatic characteristics of the day (dull
Koyuncu and Lule (2009) designed and or sunny).
manufactured bird scarer mainly consisting of
a photovoltaic (PV) panel (BP Solar SX20M Siahaan et al., (2017) designed of bird
and dimensions: 41.5x50 cm), dry-cell detector and repellent using frequency based
battery, converter, MP3 player, amplifier and Arduino Uno with android system. The
a loudspeaker (8W, 30 W). Photovoltaic panel detector was designed to detect motion from
converts solar beam radiation into DC birds, then forwarded to run driver relay and
electricity during the day. Battery is charged Android systems. The ultrasonic frequency
by PV panel and the electricity stored in this generated by the repeller can be varied by
device. The domestic bird’s predators’ calls changing the capacitor value. The detector is
were loaded to MP3 by using a PC. The associated with Pyroelectric (PIR) Sensor to

1037
 Int.J.Curr.Microbiol.App.Sci (2019) 8(2): 1035-1039

which android system is connected. PIR Ogochukwu et al., (2012) constructed and
sensor captures the movement of bird. The tested an ultrasonic bird repeller. He used the
repeller is associated with Piezo Ultrasonic ultrasonic waves; which human ears do not
Transducer which is used as an ultrasonic detect, but are perceived by small birds as a
wave transmitter or as a buzzer generated by novel technology that can effectively repel
an LC Oscillator Type Colpitts circuit. When such birds from designated places. Ultrasonic
a source movement received from the waves was successfully generated, with
Pyroelectric sensor (PIR), the relay will be automatically varied frequency (between
closed and activate the voltage source of the 15kHz and 25kHz), amplified and broadcast
transmitter. PIR sensor as a detector with a at high enough sound pressure level from a
movement distance that can be captured from locally fabricated solar powered electronic
a bird is 500 cm, according to the device. The 7.98W device produced an
characteristics of the sensor. When birds are ultrasound of 118dB, on the average will
detected then the birds will automatically be cover a distance of 45.02m2 while the 23.98W
given with ultrasonic waves. In this study, the with an ultrasound of 123dB will cover a
frequency that makes the bird disturbed is distance of 232.26m2 when placed on the
about 28 kHz - 60 kHz. The prototype is set elevation of 0.78m but when placed on the
with a frequency output of about 60 kHz. elevation of 1.86m, their average area
coverage will be 175.83m2 and 429.53m2
Muminov et al., (2017) developed a solar respectively. The ultrasonic waves created a
powered bird repeller system with effective hostile environment for the pest birds and had
bird scarer sounds. The major components of a repulsive influence on them, though they
the repeller system are a solar panel (7W, have a small radius of action but eventually
12V), an intelligent PWM solar charge drove the birds away from the designated
controller, 12V battery, MP3 player, amplifier locations. Response to the ultrasonic wave
(Stereo 20W Class D Audio Amplifier- stimulus broadcasted from the
MAX9744), two 20W speakers, three sonar environmentally friendly gadget was visibly
sensor or PIR sensor and Arduino UNO demonstrated by targeted weaver birds and
controller. The domestic predator calls and black birds but not quelea birds. The waves
special sounds (such as gunshot sounds) was travelled farther with increasing power of the
loaded to SD Card of MP3 by using a PC. The gadget and for wet days than for dry days.
amplifier increases the signal level for About 5-6 pieces of the 23.98W device will
speakers. The concept of this bird repeller be needed to cover a hectare sized field.
system is that it applies a stimulus to the wild
birds as a control function. The effect of References
sound stimuli on the birds helps to fly away
by playing several types of sound. Anonymous (2018). Bird Control.
http://www.wikiwand.com/en/Bird_co
Furtherthe image processing to detect birds ntrol Accessed on 28th October 2018.
and animals to be carried out by conducting Anonymous (2018). Bird Removal Services
several physical experiments. New algorithm by Bird Lovers. http://birdgo.co.za/
to be created using machine learning to make Accessed on 24th October 2018.
effective repeller system which will lead to Avery M. L., Werner S. J., Cummings J. L.,
new and improved models. These models will Humphrey J. S., Milleson M. P.,
lead to better understanding of birds and Carlson C. J., Primus T. M. and
animals. Goodall M. J. (2005). “Caffeine for

1038
 Int.J.Curr.Microbiol.App.Sci (2019) 8(2): 1035-1039

reducing bird damage to newly seeded (2017). “Design of Birds Detector and
rice”. Crop Protection, Vol. 24, pp. Repellent Using Frequency Based
651-657. Arduino Uno with Android System”.
Bruggers R. L. and Ruelle P. (1982). 2nd International Conferences on
“Efficacy of nets and fibers for Information Technology, Information
protecting crops from grain-eating Systems and Electrical Engineering
birds in Africa”. Crop Protection, 1(1), (ICITISEE).
pp. 55-65. Summers R. W. (1985). “The effect of scarers
Coleman J. and Spurr E. (2001). “Farmers on the presence of starlings (Sturnus
Perceptions of Bird damage and vulgaris) in cherry orchards”. Crop
Control in Arable Crops”. New Protection 4 (4), pp. 520- 528.
Zealand Plant Protection, 54:184-187. Suryawanshi V. R. (2013). “Design,
Koyuncu T. and Lule F. (2009). “Design, Manufacture and Test of a Solar
Manufacture and Test of a Solar Powered Audible Bird Scarer and
Powered Audible Bird Scarer”. Study of Sound Ranges used in it”.
International Journal of Agricultural International Journal of Science and
and Biosystems Engineering, 3(6). Research (IJSR), 4.
Muminov A., Jeon Y.C., Na D., Lee C. and Vickery J. A. and Summers R. W. (1992).
Jeon H.S. (2017). “Development of a “Cost-effectiveness of scaring brent
solar powered bird repeller system geese Branta b. bernicla from fields of
with effective bird scarer sounds”. arable crops by a human bird scarer”,
International Conference on Crop Protection 11 (5), pp. 480-484.
Information Science and Wiens J. A. and Dyer M. I. (1977).
Communications Technologies “Assessing potential impact of
(ICISCT). granivorous birds in ecosystems; in
Ogochukwu E.S., Okechukwu A.D. and Granivorous birds in ecosystems (eds)
Nnaegbo O.G. (2012). “Construction J Pinowski and S C Kendeigh”.
and Testing Of Ultrasonic Bird London: Cambridge Univ. Press. pp
Repeller”. Journal of Natural Sciences 205-268.
Research, 2(9). York D. L., Cummings J. L., Engeman R. M.,
Saglam C. and Onemli F. (2005). “The effects and Davis Jr. J. E. (2000). “Evaluation
of sowing date and sowing density on of Flight Control and Mesurol as
birds damage in the cultivators of repellents to reduce horned lark
sunflower (Helianthus annuus L.)”. (Eremophila alpestris) damage to
Journal of Tekirdag Agricultural lettuce seedlings”. Crop Protection,
Faculty, 2 (1), pp. 50-57. 19(3) pp. 201-203.
Siahaan Y., Wardijono B.A. and Mukhlis Y.

How to cite this article:

Baral, S.S., R. Swarnkar, A.V. Kothiya, A.M. Monpara and Chavda, S.K. 2019. Bird Repeller –
A Review. Int.J.Curr.Microbiol.App.Sci. 8(02): 1035-1039.
doi: https://doi.org/10.20546/ijcmas.2019.802.121

1039