
COMMISSION AGENDA – Action Item No. 8d Page 4 of 6
Meeting Date: February 11, 2025
Template revised June 27, 2019 (Diversity in Contracting).
wildlife habituating and spending more time on the airfield environment. Consequently,
there will be increased safety concerns as it’s likely more birds will congregate at SEA,
more wildlife strikes will occur, and airlines may have increased costs due to wildlife
collision damages.
(2) Losing bird detect and alert capabilities at SEA will not be responded to favorably by
airlines. Alaska Air Group has been very supportive of the Port of Seattle taking the lead
on utilizing avian radar for detecting and dispatching the Qualified Wildlife Patrol to
mitigate persistent bird issues on the airfield. They are aware of the Port’s tactical and
strategic uses of avian radar that dates to 2008. They are encouraged by the POS
pushing to improve our bird hazard reduction capabilities.
(3) It won’t be possible to conduct high quality empirical studies of hazardous wildlife
attractants as was done before. One avian radar study resulted in the POS saving
millions of dollars by not having to expend money needlessly on constructing more
costly underground vaults or floating covers to store stormwater. Airport Operations
proved that our existing mitigation measures of nets and ponds liners were highly
effective at keeping hazardous waterfowl away.
(4) Loss of forensic examinations of strike events and emerging wildlife population trends
of hazardous wildlife flying on and near the airfield.
This is not the recommended alternative.
Alternative 3 – Replace the existing avian radar system with a new system that has expanded
altitudinal coverage and can highlight geographic locations of aircraft-bird near-miss events.
Cost Implications: $4,000,000 over ten years
Pros:
(1) Ensures continued continuity of operations of bird hazard detection and alerting
capabilities will be maintained.
(2) Expected sensor improvements will help Qualified Wildlife Patrol respond more
efficiently to a greater number of identified threats resulting from more airspace being
continually monitored.
(3) Expanded airfield coverage will result in a better understanding of bird activity patterns
that can be used more predictively for prepositioning personnel to areas experiencing
a history of frequent hazardous wildlife activity prior to events.
(4) Improved capabilities of advanced sensors are expected to improve forensic
investigations of bird-aircraft collisions.
(5) Provides a platform for a fully functional ATAS with capabilities of integrating other
detection sensors.
Cons:
(1) A protracted approach towards a fully functional ATAS constructed in phases will likely
result in a slower integration of advanced target information (video, photos,
vocalizations) and therefore bird hazard type into the data stream. Knowing bird type
greatly aids in prioritizing a mitigation response as species is highly correlated with
aviation safety risk level.