Context: Bird–aircraft collisions impose an economic cost and safety risk, yet ecological studies that inform bird hazard management are few, and to date no study has formally compared species’ strike profiles across airports. In response to strike risks, airports have implemented customised management on an airport-by-airport basis, based on the assumption that strike risk stems from prevailing local circumstances. We tested this assumption by comparing a decade of wildlife–aircraft strikes at three airports situated in the same bioregion (likely to have similar fauna) of Victoria, Australia.

Aim: To compare the assemblage of wildlife struck by aircraft at three major airports in the same bioregion.

Method: Standardised wildlife strike data were analysed from three airports (Avalon, Melbourne and Essendon Airports), in the Victorian Volcanic Plains bioregion, central Victoria, Australia. Ten discrete 1-year sampling periods from each airport were compared, spanning the period 2009–19. Bird data were comparable, and data on mammals were considered less reliable, so emphasis was placed on birds in the present study.

Results: In total, 580 bird strikes were analysed, with the most commonly struck species being Australian magpie (Cracticus tibicen; 16.7%), Eurasian skylark (Alauda arvensis; 12.2%), Australian pipit (Anthus australis; 12.1%), masked lapwing (Vanellus miles; 5.9%), nankeen kestrel (Falco cenchroides; 5.0%), house sparrow (Passer domesticus; 4.8%), welcome swallow (Hirundo neoxena; 4.3%) and tree martin (Petrochelidon nigricans; 4.0%). The assemblage of birds struck by aircraft over the decade of study differed between airports. The most commonly struck species drove the assemblage differences between airports.

Conclusions and implications: In the present study system, airports experienced discrete strike risk profiles, even though they are in the same bioregion. The airports examined differed in terms of air traffic movement rates, aircraft types, landscape context and bird hazard management effort. Given that strike risks profiles differ among airports, customised management at each airport, as is currently the case, is supported.

背景：鸟类与飞机的碰撞带来了经济损失和安全风险，然而，有关鸟类危害管理的生态学研究很少，而且迄今为止，还没有研究正式比较过整个机场物种的撞击情况。为了应对罢工风险，机场基于罢工风险源自当地普遍情况的假设，在逐个机场的基础上实施了定制管理。我们通过比较位于澳大利亚维多利亚州同一生物区域（可能具有相似动物区系）的三个机场的十年野生动植物袭击来检验了这一假设。

目的：比较飞机在同一生物区域的三个主要机场撞到的野生生物的种类。

方法：在澳大利亚维多利亚州中部维多利亚火山平原生物区的三个机场（阿瓦隆，墨尔本和埃森登机场）对标准化的野生动植物罢工数据进行了分析。比较了每个机场在2009–19年期间的10个离散的1年采样期。鸟类数据具有可比性，并且哺乳动物数据被认为较不可靠，因此在本研究中重点放在鸟类上。

结果：总共分析了580次鸟罢工，其中最常见的鸟类是澳大利亚（Cracticus tibicen； 16.7％），欧亚云雀（Alauda arvensis； 12.2％），澳大利亚Australian（Anthus australis； 12.1％），蒙面田（Vanellus英里; 5.9％），Nankeen红est（Falco ench鱼; 5.0％），麻雀（Passer domesticus ; 4.8％），燕子（Hirundo neoxena ; 4.3％）和树马丁（Petrochelidon nigricans ; 4.0％）。在十年的研究中，飞机撞击的鸟类的集合在不同的机场之间有所不同。最常见的被撞物种导致机场之间的组合差异。

结论和启示：在本研究系统中，即使机场位于同一生物区域内，机场也经历了离散的罢工风险状况。所检查的机场在空中交通流量，飞机类型，景观环境和鸟类危害管理工作方面有所不同。鉴于机场之间的罢工风险状况有所不同，因此支持当前每个机场的定制管理。