In a bizarre move, Regents Park in London is to 'ban' Canada Geese because it claims that the geese pose a danger to the public.
London's royal parks have become notorious for their callous treatment of wildlife which has included mass culling of the animals that inhabit these popular oases of calm in the city, 11,000 animals slaughtered by park authorities at the last count...
Now it seems that the 400 geese which have been regular summer visitors to the park for years will no longer be welcome due to the 'danger' posed to the general public by the birds' droppings, which the park authorities claim make surfaces slippery.
But rather than tackle the problem, they have decided that banning the birds entirely will be the most sensible solution. Hmm. One really has to marvel at such intellect...
The geese arrive annually in order to spend a few weeks at the park's boating lake while they moult. Most people enjoy watching their characterful antics and might well be nonplussed at the park's baffling decision which will involve fencing off the lake to prevent the geese from taking their annual summer holiday. There is no mention as to where the geese will go when they find their usual destination closed to them....
Surely one of the primary reasons people visit parks is to encounter wildlife and it is often the only opportunity for town and city dwellers to enjoy nature in urban environments.
This stupid decision is just another reason to question the competence of the Royal park authorities and one wonders where the nonsense will end.
Perhaps only when they have eradicated all of the wildlife for which the parks are justly famous.
There has been so much kind interest in my campaign to stop councils from imposing fines on people whose only 'crime' is feeding wild birds. Victimisation of decent, law abiding people (often the more vulnerable in our society) is not something that we should accept, it is wrong and cruel.
Our petition is doing well, we have about 1100 signatures as I write and I've contacted the relevant department in British government with my proposal to set up areas in towns and cities where good people can feed the birds without fear of being persecuted.... there is a worrying intolerance towards those who care for urban wildlife and it's a trend among the less informed to view pigeons and gulls (and other wild creatures) as 'vermin' which is incredibly ignorant.
Anyway I thought I'd share with you some of the comments I've received from those signing my petition and championing our cause. I couldn't include them all here but each and every one has been read and appreciated. The comments speak for themselves but one recurring theme is that of compassion, something that seems to be in short supply in 2018....
Thank you all for your support and please keep sharing the petition, for the sake of all of us who value our human right to show compassion, our freedom of choice - and especially for the birds.
"I am one of those who derive so much pleasure interacting with these dear birds. I suffer with chronic depression and, for a small while, these interactions make me happy."
"I would love nothing more than to be able to feed the pigeons in designated areas - please allow us this pleasure ."
"Pigeons are beautiful animals that warm the heart and lift the spirit. Just as they benefit us through their behavior and trusting nature, so should we benefit them through food and providing a safe living and nesting environment."
"Omg! Feeding wildlife is a crime? Whats wrong with you!? I feed birds every week, it's called compassion, and it makes me and the birds happy!"
"compassion is a trait to be celebrated..."
"I feed the pigeons everyday. It's something I look forward to. The birds trust me which is a pleasure to see. I've been insulted and threatened. I care not a jot. I will carry on feeding them......"
"All birds need food. Once again humans deciding which ones they "like" and which are "vermin"...."
"Kindness should be applauded not fined"
"Porque no somos delincuentes. Somos sensibles y amante de los animales"
..."we are not criminals. We are sensitive and loving of the animals...."
"We have taken over their habitat. We owe them."
"I'm signing because I love birds"
"The birds might be the only regular contact that these people have with another living being....."
"Pigeons and other birds pose no threat or health risk to humans. We should embrace our wildlife, not punish it for us taking over their natural habitat. The least we humans can do is have some compassion."
"Something is very wrong in the world if we punish compassion and encourage cruelty."
"Feeding the birds is simply showing empathy. Is that wrong?"
Thanks to you all, lovely people, your support is heartwarming, Jase 😊
Sign the petition HERE (and please carry on sharing!)
Hacked to pieces.
The majestic Larch which we awaited every spring bursting, as it did, into bright lime green, renewed and fresh, a sign of hope for one and all. We saw it from the back windows of our house and it lifted the spirit and refreshed the soul.
Now it is gone.
This morning I heard the chainsaws and my heart sank. I hoped against hope that it wasn't the Larch, that perhaps it was just some fool stupidly cutting their overgrown ivy in the midst of winter's snow and ice, as fools are wont to do.
But it was so much worse, it was a team of hooligans, masquerading as tree 'surgeons' in bright dayglo jackets as if they cared, hacking down the beautiful Larch.
The ignorant perpetrators probably thought that it was dead; the Larch, a majestic tree in its summer splendour, being the only deciduous member of the conifer family. Here it was in deep winter sleep, but the sap was rising. And although ignorance may be bliss for some, it is no excuse for desecration.
In the whole neighborhood, there now remains just one single mature tree, a lone oak. The people who own the garden, where this oak lives, are lovers of nature so there is hope that their appreciation will extend to this final surviving tree.
But for now, I close the door to the back rooms of our house as the chainsaw rattles on and the last remaining limbs of the Larch fall to the ground, its spirit extinguished and its beauty lost.
The Larch, her fresh green light in spring,
will no more hear my spirit sing.
I watched in anguish, broken hearted,
as she fell, her soul departed.
Hacked and murdered, killed by fools
whose reckless whim was learnt in schools.
Where once they'd teach appreciation
now they just preach desecration.
The Larch which stood a hundred years
through war and peace, through joy and tears.
Goodbye companion, mighty tree.
My friend and my soliloquy.
© Jason Endfield 2018
Urban Myth: “a modern story of obscure origin and with little or no supporting evidence that spreads spontaneously in varying forms and often has elements of horror”
There was an avalanche of comments across social media in response to my post about the fines being handed out to people feeding urban birds.
Most of those who responded are wholly against any penalties for this apparently innocent pastime and many are absolutely adamant that they will continue to feed our feathered friends - even it it brings them into conflict with the authorities...or nosy neighbours.
Of those who supported the fines, the most often voiced complaint was that of vicious 'dive bombing' gulls. These horror stories of gulls attacking people are very prominent whenever there is any debate over 'controlling' or 'managing' urban wildlife, with many urging for a cull to put an end to the perceived problem.
Vicious Seagulls = Fake News?
But are these horror stories just that? Made up stories? Myths?
We've all seen the hysterical headlines along the lines of "seagull nearly killed my Nan" and "left for dead by violent gang of gulls" but are dive-bombing gulls a real problem or just an urban myth?
Having spent a great deal of time by the sea, I can honestly say that I've never ever encountered a malicious seagull. Sure, if you hold a chip in the air, especially during the gull's nesting season, then you may be lucky enough (or unlucky enough - depending on your outlook) to have a close encounter with one of these magnificent birds, but I have my doubts as to whether such encounters are commonplace – and whether they are in fact really 'horrific' and 'vicious' or just surprising and delightful.
I take all these newspaper reports with a large pinch of salt, much as I do with my chips at the seaside. Sensational headlines claiming that gulls are attacking people purposefully and violently are probably mostly nonsense.
A British Problem?
And is this a purely British invention? What of overseas gulls? Do Dutch gulls attack people too? Or those in Canada? Apparently they are all well mannered.... hmm, something fishy there then.
There may of course have been occasions when a gull, in defence of its nesting territory, has warned off what it sees as a potential threat– but that's natural and something we must respect. Many species of gull are in rapid decline as we have over-fished their territory out at sea and deprived them of their food source.
First Hand Accounts Welcome...
So, if anyone can provide first hand accounts of being attacked by vicious birds then I'd be very open to hearing from you.
Meanwhile I remain skeptical and might even go as far as to suggest that dive bombing sea gulls really are an urban myth, invented - or at least exaggerated - in order to provide an excuse to label them as 'pests' and eradicate them.
Sign My Petition
I've set up a petition to encourage local councils to establish bird feeding areas in towns and cities. This will enable those of us who love to feed birds the opportunity to do so without being slapped with a fine. It will also allow those odd people who have an aversion to winged creatures the option to avoid the area. Licensed seed sellers could provide suitable food and everyone will be happy.
Please take a moment to sign the petition and let's see if we can put an and end to this ridiculous culture of persecuting birds – and the good folks who feed them.
PLEASE SIGN THE PETITION BY CLICKING HERE, THANK YOU.
A woman in the British city of Bath has been vilified in the local press for feeding birds. The Bath Chronicle published an undercover photograph of the woman, who was feeding gulls, portraying her as if she were some dangerous criminal - and its readers were equally irrational with their comments. One reader called her a “stupid woman” while the newspaper itself went on to give handy tips to its ignorant readership in a section they titled “How can you help rid Bath of seagulls?”
What is wrong with the people of Bath? Are their lives so little that they need to round on a harmless, lonely woman whose only 'crime' is feeding birds?
But this heartless attitude is not peculiar to Bath. It's a nationwide problem.
At what point did the British psyche change from the days I remember well, when the public were positively encouraged to feed pigeons and other city and garden birds? In London's Trafalgar Square, for example, it was always a treat to buy a little tub of seed from sellers dotted around the area and marvel at the birds as they swooped down to feed, often landing on the delighted public, in a rare and wonderful interaction with wildlife. The thrill of this encounter was celebrated in photographs that fill the pages of aging albums and scrapbooks, and is remembered with fondness from generation to generation.
But something has drastically changed along the way.
Now you can be fined for feeding birds in some areas.
In today's newspapers, rarely a week goes by without an account of someone being handed a hefty fine for feeding birds somewhere in the UK.
Law abiding citizens, usually pensioners, are being ordered to pay penalties, sometimes thousands of pounds, for feeding birds even in their own gardens, after nosy neighbours report them to the authorities.
Some elderly people are even being physically assaulted for throwing crumbs to ducks in the park. In Buxton, an 86 year old man was viciously kicked and punched for feeding ducks near his home, by a thug who told him that it encouraged rats.
Meanwhile councils up and down the country are vowing to deal with the 'problem' of birds which are now widely described as 'pests'. Often an excuse to justify the term 'pest' is the assertion that the birds (especially pigeons) spread disease. This is rarely the case. Birds in the UK are not pests, indeed they have never been viewed as pests until now and this shift in attitude seems to be a very recent development, going hand in hand with a growing public intolerance towards anything natural.
Those who will chop down a tree in their garden because it's 'in the way' are the same people who will write to the local press in order to torment an innocent lady feeding birds in a quiet corner of Bath, the city she calls home.
The Bath Chronicle - and its readers - in criticising the innocent woman, should be thoroughly ashamed of themselves and should examine their own reasons for hounding someone whose only 'crime' was compassion.
With all the terrible things going on in this world, surely we have better and more important things to do than to bully those in our community, often the elderly and lonely, who just want to experience the beauty and delight in occasionally throwing a few scraps to our native wildlife....
UPDATE: I have set up a petition to stop councils from imposing fines and encouraging them to establish bird-feeding areas in towns and cities. Please sign and share! CLICK HERE. Thank you.
Developers would have to pledge to plant three trees for every one they cut down - this could be law if enough public pressure is put on the government to instigate a parliamentary debate on the proposal.
But there's a long way to go.....
When Liverpool City Council granted permission to hack down 36 mature Plane trees last year to make way for a hideous multi storey car park, one could be forgiven for thinking we were back in the 1970's when planning regulations allowed such things to happen. Apparently it is 'progress', illustrating that we have learnt nothing. The council assured concerned locals at the time that they would plant 90 new trees in the vicinity once the project was completed, to offset the loss of the healthy trees.
That hasn't happened.
What have appeared are just three small token trees and about 100 tufts of ornamental grass a few inches high, which, if one were cynical, might be interpreted as the council's way of fulfilling their pledge to plant 'trees'....
With this in mind, I was heartened to find that there is a campaign to change the law regarding the unchecked felling of healthy trees. The petition suggests that for each tree a company cuts down, they will have to plant three more in its place.
While at first this might sound like an impractical plan in an age where development, at the expense of nature, appears to be out of control, the important part of the idea is that it would certainly discourage some of the frenzied felling of trees we are seeing currently in the UK and elsewhere. No more excuses from companies and individuals who at the moment only have to assert that a tree is 'diseased' in order to chop it down.
It really should be common knowledge that trees are vital for the survival of the human race – and much more importantly, all of the other life that this planet supports.
In the UK, trees provide the only habitat for many birds, squirrels, bats and insects.
Developers are only interested in making money, that's their business after all, and so they pay little heed to the environment in spite of their claims to care.
I doubt that the 90 trees Liverpool City Council pledged will ever materialise, it may well be another case of throwaway words, spouted to pacify the genuine concerns of a community who see their green spaces being taken away.
(If the Council wishes to respond I'd be very happy to hear from them).
In summary, those cutting down healthy trees for whatever reason must be held to account and I am fully supportive of a law which would permit the felling of a tree only on the strict understanding that another three would be planted nearby in its place. Making that a legal obligation would be a good place to start and would surely discourage those who wantonly destroy our natural environment from doing so without justification.
I urge readers to sign this petition. (It's for UK residents only I'm afraid).
It's early days but this seems like an important step forward in protecting our trees for the future.
Please sign the petition by clicking: HERE
When a plan for a wind farm entails felling more than 180 acres of forest and destroying large swathes of irreplaceable peat-land, then there is clearly something very wrong, and even sinister, at its core.
Next week, a local council in Donegal, Ireland will meet to make a decision on such a development.
The proposal to install 19 enormous wind turbines in pristine countryside is being opposed by locals but, as we know from experience, the local people are often of least concern to the energy companies who are out to make a fast buck at the expense of rural communities, the environment and precious countryside.
Each of the 19 turbines would be nearly 160 meters high (that's more than 500 feet from the ground to the tip of the blade) and would be visible for miles in this stunning part of Ireland, famous for its beautiful scenery and vistas.
Donegal's Finn Valley and the iconic landscape around the area of Barnesmore Gap are specifically the areas earmarked for development and many local people are furious about the plan.
Opposition group Finn Valley Wind Action point out that the project would affect 246,075 cubic meters of valuable peat habitat, a haven for wildlife and an especially delicate ecosystem. Water pollution would be unavoidable, they say, as swathes of trees would be felled and peat damaged and destroyed, making its way into river catchments through heavy rain. “This development carries a huge environmental footprint,” they say, “with significant risks to the public water supply. The application in its entirety is cause for huge concern.”
Many readers will know that I am vehemently opposed to wind farms which I view as something of a con. Sold to us as 'green', they are not only a blot on the landscape but are often largely inefficient and hugely destructive to wildlife and the environment both in manufacture and installation.
Brave communities are fighting their own battles against 'big wind' developers in Scotland, Wales and Ireland as I write. In England, a temporary halt in planning permission for onshore wind development has been overtaken by plans for massive offshore developments, just as damaging in their own way to bird life (and probably marine life too).
When will the truth be exposed? When enough people open their eyes to the horror that these developments really are - that they are potentially catastrophic to the natural world. Which is why I will continue to voice my concerns loudly and widely.
For more information about the plans for Donegal and the community's opposition to the industrial development of their natural and precious environment, please visit Finn Valley Wind Action's Facebook page HERE.
I've uncovered another disgusting bird cull - this time in the US...
So, it's 'name and shame' time again.... and today's award for most repulsive city goes to:-
Grand Island, Nebraska.....
which this week sanctioned the mass extermination of the city's Starling population by way of a slow acting poison called DRC-1339.
The toxin which is widely used in the US, causes a lingering death through uremic (kidney) damage and the slow congestion of major organs. It takes between 24 and 36 hours for the birds to die.
Observers have described seeing birds falling out of the sky in great numbers following its use.
DRC-1339, which is lethal to Starlings and Gulls is likely to prove fatal to many other species too (according to Wildearthguardians.org, the list of 'non-target species' killed by the poison in the US probably includes Savannah Sparrows, Mourning Doves, Meadowlarks, American Robins, Canada Geese, Mallards and many many more).
The city of Grand Island has warned residents who find dead Starlings to wear gloves and dispose of the birds 'in trash containers'.
According to a press release, the city authorities justified their action by claiming that "many residents have expressed concerns of noise and filth nuisances related to the starlings. But of most concern”, they say, “is the health nuisance caused by the droppings of the birds".
My heart sinks at the thought of many thousands of birds suffering a slow and painful death and all because of human intolerance of other species.
The fact that this story barely even made the news is a scandalous reflection on the apathetic attitudes of the vast majority towards wildlife.
The citizens of Grand Island, Nebraska will have to live with this murderous episode on their collective conscience.
But I think it is about time to enforce a total ban on the use of such potentially catastrophic methods of wildlife 'control' and to stop referring to any species as a 'pest' just to provide an excuse to eradicate them.
SEARCH ALL MY BLOG POSTS HERE