Action Synopsis: Bird Conservation About Actions

Mark power lines to reduce incidental bird mortality

How is the evidence assessed?
  • Effectiveness
  • Certainty
  • Harms

Study locations

Key messages

  • A total of eight studies and two literature reviews from across the world found that marking power lines led to significant reductions in collision rates or dangerous flight behaviour (i.e. approaching close to power lines) in cranes Grus spp., mute swans Cygnus olor and other bird species.
  • All markers except thin, black plastic strips or neoprene crosses were effective, with no differences in effectiveness between Bird Flight Diverters (BFDs: brightly coloured plastic spirals) and static fibreglass plates and only a small possible difference between BFDs and ‘flappers’ (moving markers).


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

  1. A replicated, paired sites study (Morkill & Anderson 1991) in south-central Nebraska, USA, between 1988-1990, found that marking the static wire of nine spans of high-voltage transmission wire reduced collision mortality in sandhill cranes Grus canadensis by 66% compared with unmarked spans (11 fatalities vs. 25). Crane flocks were also more likely to increase altitude (454 flocks vs. 397) or change direction gradually (114 vs. 92) when flying close to marked spans, but were less likely to react quickly (and potentially dangerously) to marked spans (19 vs. 36) or show no reaction (1,200 vs. 768). Experimental spans were 1-2.5 km in length and marked with yellow aviation balls (30 cm in diameter with a vertical black stripe) at 100m intervals, staggered to appear more closely spaced.

    Study and other actions tested
  2. A controlled before-and-after trial in the winters of 1989-90 and 1990-1 in mixed woodland and farmland in Extremadura, Spain (Alonso et al. 1994), found there were fewer collisions and fewer birds flying between lines following the marking of four sections of line (60% reduction in fatalities: 45 vs. 18; 61% decrease in birds flying between lines: 357 birds/day vs. 124 birds/day). There were no such decreases at unmarked spans of wire (19 vs. 15 fatalities). Markers were coloured PVC spirals (1 m long, 30 cm in diameter) attached every 10m.

    Study and other actions tested
  3. A paired sites study in autumn and spring 1988-1991 in mixed wetlands, croplands and uplands in south-central Colorado, USA (Brown & Drewien 1995), found that collision mortality was 61% lower in four spans marked by ‘dampers’ and 63% lower in four spans marked by ‘plates’ compared with eight unmarked spans. Birds also reacted to marked lines earlier and flew over them at a greater height. ‘Dampers’ were yellow, spiral vibration dampers, 112-125 cm long, placed at 3.3 m intervals; ‘plates’ were yellow fibreglass plates, 30.5 x 30.5 cm with a 5 cm diagonal black strip, placed at 23-32 m intervals. Both markers were placed on two spans of 7.2 kV distribution lines and two of 69-115 kV transmission lines, with all spans totalling 13.2 km. Most birds killed were sandhill cranes Grus canadensis and wildfowl.

    Study and other actions tested
  4. A paired sites study in 1991-4 in coastal wetlands in South Carolina, USA (Savereno et al. 1996), found a 53% reduction in collision mortalities at a 3.9 km span of 115 kV transmission lines where the static wires were marked, compared to a 1.2 km unmarked span. A higher proportion of birds approaching marked wires at the most dangerous height (between transmission wires and earth wire) reacted to them, compared to unmarked wires (98% of 9,819 flocks vs. 89% of 4,209 flocks respectively) and fewer crossed the wires at this height (4% vs. 24%). However, overall, a higher percentage of birds reacted to lines at unmarked spans (40% of 17,391 flocks vs. 34% of 64,512 flocks). The experimental span was marked with yellow aviation balls (30 cm in diameter with a vertical black stripe) at 61 m intervals, staggered to give the appearance of a 30.5 m spacing.

    Study and other actions tested
  5. A controlled before-and-after study of three different markers at three sites in Spain in 1991-5 (Janss & Ferrer 1998) found that markers differed in their effects. In grassland and arable land in Badajoz, collision mortality across all species was 81% lower following the installation of white plastic spirals (expected mortality of 47 birds, actual mortality of nine). In mixed cattle grazing and cereal cropland in Cáceres, the total number of collisions (72) remained constant following the installation of neoprene strips, but there was a 76% reduction in collision mortality when great bustards Otis tarda were excluded from the analysis. In a wetland in Huelva there was no difference in collision mortality after the installation of black plastic strips (6 collisions in marked vs. 12 in unmarked spans). Plastic spirals were 1m long, 30 cm maximum diameter and placed every 10 m on static wires, staggered to give the appearance of a 5 m placement. Neoprene bands were crossed black strips, 35 x 5 cm with a 5 x 4 cm phosphorescent stripe, installed every 20 m on conductor wires and staggered to give the appearance of a 10 m placement. Black plastic stripes were 70 x 0.8 cm and hung every 12 m on a distribution line.

    Study and other actions tested
  6. A literature review (Davis 1998) found three studies, all of which show a reduction in crane Grus spp. mortality, following the marking of power lines. Morkill & Anderson (1991) and Brown & Drewien (1995) are discussed elsewhere. The third study found that marking, burying or removing power lines in Japan reduced the percentage of red-crowned crane Grus japonicus mortalities attributed to power line collisions from 70.9% (1970-4) to 26.8% (1980-4). The rate of population increase rose from 5.9% (1970-4) to 18.9% (1980-4). There was also an increase in the number of breeding pairs and the percentage of juveniles in the population.

    Study and other actions tested
  7. A controlled before-and-after study in 1997-2000 in northern Colombia (De la Zerda & Roselli 2003) found that the average number of bird deaths due to collision with power lines was significantly lower (5.3 deaths/ha) in a site where the ground wires were marked with yellow plastic spirals than for an unmarked circuit (13.6 deaths/ha); no significant difference in collision mortality between the circuits was detected prior to marking. A total of 810 birds of 47 species were found.

    Study and other actions tested
  8. A before-and-after trial at a wetland site in Essex, England (Frost 2010), installed 500 red, spiral-shaped ‘flight diverters’ (32 cm long, 17.5 cm in diameter) at 5 m intervals along 1.5 km of power lines. In two springs preceding installation (2004 and 2006), 28 mute swans Cygnus olor were killed through collisions with the wires. Following installation, one swan was killed in the springs of 2007 and 2008 combined.

    Study and other actions tested
  9. A replicated, controlled before-and-after trial over the winters of 2003-4, 2004-5 and 2005-6, in mixed wetland and crops on Staten Island, California, USA (Yee 2008), found a 60% reduction in collision mortality across all species following the installation of ‘Firefly bird flappers’ on 20 spans of a 5.6 km section of 12 kV wire. There was also a smaller (approximately 10%) reduction in mortality in nine spans adjacent to marked spans. There was no corresponding decrease in collision mortality in 20 unmarked spans. However, markers did not appear to have an effect on bird flight behaviour. Markers were 15 x 9 cm acrylic sheets of two contrasting colours with a luminescent strip and placed at 15 m intervals, staggered to appear 5m apart. A total of 65 fatalities were recorded over the three winters.

    Study and other actions tested
  10. A 2010 literature review (Jenkins et al. 2010) found significant reductions in bird mortality following the marking of power lines in the USA and South Africa. A before-and-after trial over two years in Indiana (Crowder 2000), USA, found significantly reduced mortality with both Bird Flight Diverters (BFDs, 73% fewer fatalities) and larger ‘Swan Flight Diverters’ (50% fewer). The reviewers noted that there was considerable variability in collision rates across all sites. A before-and-after trial over three years in Karoo, South Africa (Anderson 2002) found a 67% reduction in collision mortality following the marking of both earth wires of 10 km of 132 kV line with BFDs (30 cm long) every 10 m. The same study also found that spans marked with BFDs and ‘flappers’ (loosely suspended polycarbon discs) had 52% lower collision mortality than spans marked just with BFDs, and 80% lower collision mortality than the same spans prior to marking. Spans with just flappers had 60% lower mortality than those with BFDs but the results are inconclusive. The reviewers noted a considerable decrease in blue crane Anthropoides paradiseus and Ludwig’s bustard Neotis ludwigii (the main species colliding with the line) populations in the area following marking.

    Additional references

    Anderson, M. D. (2002) Large terrestrial bird powerline project. Unpublished report Eskom, Johannesburg.

    Crowder, M. R. (2000) Assessment of devices designed to lower the incidence of avian power line strikes. Masters of Science Thesis, Purdue University, East LaFayette, IN. 91p.


    Study and other actions tested
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

Bird Conservation

This Action forms part of the Action Synopsis:

Bird Conservation
What Works 2021 cover

What Works in Conservation

What Works in Conservation provides expert assessments of the effectiveness of actions, based on summarised evidence, in synopses. Subjects covered so far include amphibians, birds, mammals, forests, peatland and control of freshwater invasive species. More are in progress.

More about What Works in Conservation

Download free PDF or purchase
The Conservation Evidence Journal

The Conservation Evidence Journal

An online, free to publish in, open-access journal publishing results from research and projects that test the effectiveness of conservation actions.

Read the latest volume: Volume 21

Go to the CE Journal

Discover more on our blog

Our blog contains the latest news and updates from the Conservation Evidence team, the Conservation Evidence Journal, and our global partners in evidence-based conservation.

Who uses Conservation Evidence?

Meet some of the evidence champions

Endangered Landscape ProgrammeRed List Champion - Arc Kent Wildlife Trust The Rufford Foundation Save the Frogs - Ghana Mauritian Wildlife Supporting Conservation Leaders
Sustainability Dashboard National Biodiversity Network Frog Life The international journey of Conservation - Oryx Cool Farm Alliance UNEP AWFA Bat Conservation InternationalPeople trust for endangered species Vincet Wildlife Trust