Minnesota researchers discovered that black bears experience rapid heart rates when unmanned drones hover nearby.
It was recently discovered by the Minnesota scientists that black bears don’t seem to like UAVs because of their skyrocketing heart rates whenever the drone flew overhead. This wouldn’t be known if the bears were not being monitored for other research reasons, which had nothing to do with drones. The scientists, during the research, thought it might be interesting to know about the reactions of bears to little unmanned flying machines.
Scroll down for video
After the scientists had documented the alarm and irritation of the bears to drones, humans were assured to be the only mammals with the means to knock drones out of the air. However, there have been no words on how the birds react to these drones for disrupting their airspace, be it eagles, geese, sandcastles cranes, or ticked-off sparrows.
The Dakota police are, however, hoping that birds don’t attack an armed drone that is sent up. In August, the North Dakota legislature passed a law that made the Peace Garden State the first to allow police drones to carry weapons like tear gas and stun guns.
Animal Rights Group PETA
For example, the animal-rights group People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) has been persuading folks to buy drones to monitor hunters. Leaving it all to PETA, one will be shocked when a hunter shoots down one of their drones while hovering above a gun club’s property in Pennsylvania where members were holding a pigeon shoot. Why evils, right? It is unconditionally hard to believe that PETA didn’t consider that harassing people toting shotguns might make someone plaster a slow-moving drone piloted by a dweeb with a joystick.
However, in Canada, Ottawa City councilors are contemplating on whether to hire a six-rotor drone dubbed the Goosebuster to drive Canada geese from it’s parks. While working, the drones also carry sound equipment and screeches like an Eagle. The drone’s owner eventually moved them from a city park after continuously sending them after urban geese in a preliminary test.
A realtor was reported to have gotten into trouble in Australia while using a drone to show one of its prospective buyers an aerial view of the upscale neighborhood where they might be living. When he launched the drone from the house’s property, the realtor caught one of the neighbor’s sunbathing topless. Even though the neighbor was embarrassed, she was still grateful that she was on her stomach when the drone flew while transmitting footage to both the realtor and his attentive clients.
Drones allowed scientists to keep better track of whitetail deer and animals fitted with monitoring collars. It is not necessary for drones to work to irritate people or bears.
There were two recent cases: homeowners in Kentucky and California who blasted drones from the airspace above their properties. The Kentucky shooter, however, claimed he was protecting his sunbathing daughter’s privacy.
A shotgun shell named Drone Munitions was created by an ammunition manufacturer in Idaho Snake River Shooting Products in a bid to ensure protection of personal airspace. These were “engineered” to drop irritating drones in their properties wash. What makes the three-inch shotgun shell loaded with common BB or No. 2 pellets were still unknown, but if you want to blast a high-flying drone, then a glorified goose load probably would outperform No. 8 dove loads.
Mostly, hunters are often quicker to foresee how someone could make use of drone technology for wicked reasons or unfair advantage. We seem to have the original instinct to stake out hunting turns and demand everyone else hunt by our personal rules of conduct especially if it’s something that we can’t afford but that our competition can afford. Nationwide, hunters have, however, been pleased by lawmakers with the law passed on the use of drones as hunting aids.
These hunting bans sound like good idea given that the Minnesota scientists discovered the impact of drones on black bears and the Goosebuster’s impact on geese. We don’t need hunter-driven drones staging a deer drive that inadvertently sends frightened bruins, wolves, coyotes, weasels, and random lawmakers panicking across backyards and down rural boulevards. There will always be one or two people out there who would think that these scientists are doing good things with drones and they would be hurt if drones are banned. Thus, if a moose, bear, wolf, turkey, or any other animal is fitted with a GPS or transmitting collar, it would be a lot easier and cheaper to send in a camera-equipped drone to check up on the critter occasionally.
Dispatching is another alternative, which is an expeditionary force of graduate students and some flabby professors into the forest to verify some things.