*Environment Agency is linked to decision, claiming that 'excessive gull numbers' are 'undesirable'
*Licence holder is a 'bird control business' - but doesn't seem to know one species from another. *Hundreds and hundreds of birds killed - and applicant refers to them all as 'seagulls' So finally, after many people contacted their MPs (thank you!) and after I submitted a complaint to the ICO, Natural England responded to my Freedom Of Information request relating to the example Herring Gull kill licence. I've been wading through the documents they sent me and trying to make sense of what still seems to be utterly senseless killing. This licence was just one of many that the agency issued to kill red-listed Herring Gulls (and as we now know dozens of other species too). I wanted to know the reasons behind the decision to grant these kill licences. That's how this particular FOI request came about. Though there is a bit of an overload of information, I'd ask you to please bear with me, both now as I provide an initial overview, and later as I examine the details of this and other licences further. "Public health and safety risk" - Natural England's answer? Shoot the birds. In 2015, Natural England prepared a 'Technical Assessment' of this particular application to kill Herring Gulls (and additionally Black Headed Gulls which were also on the same licence application). This licence was a renewal, permission having been granted for the applicant to kill Herring Gulls since at least 2010, a year after the species was red listed as being of critical conservation concern. Natural England approved the killing to take place at "a number of landfill sites in Cornwall, Devon, Somerset, Dorset and Hampshire", where according to the application, scaring and other methods of control had not been considered effective enough. They issued the following judgement as part of their assessment. "The presence of gulls, which scavenge on waste food at the landfill sites, creates not just a public health [risk] (transfer of disease, especially via droppings, on and off site) but also creates a public safety risk for operatives working on the sites, including the obscuring of the vision of drivers when gulls take flight in large numbers immediately ahead of site vehicles." They decided that the answer to this 'problem' was to shoot the birds. Among the licensing criteria that Natural England include in their assessment is a question: "Is there clear evidence that the species in question is causing or is likely to cause serious damage?" to which they have answered 'yes'. This seems to me to be a highly contentious response. In its conclusion and justification for issuing the licence, Natural England state that "The HG [Herring Gulls] and BHG [Black Headed Gulls] on these landfill sites present a significant public health....and public safety risk...The EA [Environment Agency] has made representations to the landfill site owners / operators about excessive gull numbers, which the EA consider could breach the terms of the operating licence." They add, "The licensed shooting of a limited number of gulls, as an enhancement to existing scaring techniques clearly reduces the numbers of adults and juveniles frequenting the landfill site..." Is the Environment Agency behind disturbing plan to kill the gulls? And that brings me to perhaps one of the most illuminating pieces of information that has emerged so far; in the case of this example licence at least, the Environment Agency seems to be the driving force behind the whole sorry situation. Yes, the Environment Agency, whose original 'vision', was that they "...want people to have peace of mind, knowing that they live in a clean and safe environment, rich in wildlife and natural diversity - one they can enjoy to the full, but feel motivated to care for". Rich in wildlife and natural diversity? But presumably that doesn't include Gulls then? The Environment Agency is, like Natural England, a non-departmental government body, sponsored by DEFRA. So it's not surprising that the two bodies might work closely together. But that in itself suggests the absence of an independent free-thinking outlook. The presence of a large number of gulls is 'undesirable' - Environment Agency The documents sent to me by Natural England include copies of the licence, renewals and various notes and returns. The notes (of which there are many), state (as I mentioned earlier) that "The EA [Environment Agency] has made representations to the landfill site owners / operators about excessive gull numbers". What constitutes 'excessive' and who decides the figure? They also state that "Environment Agency staff carry out spot-checks on the landfill sites and consider the presence of [a] large number of gulls undesirable...." Licence holder is a 'bird control business' - who doesn't know one gull from another... The actual application for this Herring Gull kill licence (and the subsequent renewals of the licence) is apparently linked to one individual man, described by Natural England as someone 'who runs a bird control business'. He has the contract to kill the gulls at a number of landfill sites in the South West. But he doesn't appear to know much about birds... In a letter he wrote to Natural England in 2014, he referred to 'seagulls' three times and also to 'Lesser Black Headed Gulls' As we know there is no such thing as a 'seagull', let alone the, hitherto unknown, Lesser Black Headed Gull... all of which illustrates that the person pulling the trigger is very unprofessional and ignorant. Who knows whether he did in fact shoot the actual species for which permission had been granted or just hundreds of random 'seagulls'? And shouldn't Natural England have picked up on this huge error? "Help in the future would be larger culling numbers..." says licence holder In 2013, the same licence holder wrote to Natural England and said "we have to keep the site management and the Environment Agency happy but stay within your licence. Help in the future would be larger culling numbers or speed to increase licence conditions". He added that "to help us through the most active periods this year we spent more time culling corvids." Nice people.... Of course Natural England has withheld any information that might identify him. At least they thought they had..... I seem to have found a clear reference to his identity within the documents that they sent me - which, considering that Natural England is always so vociferous about the need to protect an applicant's privacy, shows a shocking lack of attention to detail and illustrates that the agency doesn't actually protect the applicant's identity very well at all. I won't be so bold as to disclose the applicant's identity here, he is after all only the person contracted by the companies that run the landfill sites. But although we don't need to know the identity of the person who carries out the actual killing, especially when it is an individual, we have every right, in my opinion, to know who is asking for the lethal control of our birds, whether it be local authorities or, as in this case, the companies responsible for running landfill sites. And quite why the Environment Agency has so much sway in the whole process is very questionable. The public must be allowed a voice, every bit as loud as that of the EA. Is Natural England's famous 'five point test' just guff? This licence of course is just one of very many that the agency issues to kill Herring Gulls - and, as we know, dozens of other species of our native birds too. The red-listed status doesn't seem to mean very much when Natural England is making decisions. Though they are keen to tell me, often, all about their 'five point test' when assessing applications to kill birds, it might appear to some of us that the test really isn't very robust given the shockingly high numbers of birds killed. Independent monitoring body urgently needed So, these are my first impressions of the information. I'm sure most of you will be just as frustrated and angry as I am that all this information does is to underline the fact that Natural England, and quite probably other government agencies too, are not acting in our best interests. We need to have a say in the licensing decisions. And to know that those carrying out any actions under licences are competent. There needs, urgently, to be a totally independent body established to oversee Natural England's shambolic licensing system, and we need full transparency over each and every licence - without having to chase overdue FOI requests. If you haven't already signed the petition, please do so, CLICK HERE Best, Jase
87 Comments
amanda reid
9/8/2019 05:21:04 pm
We are being governed by psychopaths . Kennedy warned us about this . Illuminati are in control right now . They do not want us to enjoy nature . They are killing everything . We live in a wicked world.
Reply
9/8/2019 05:27:26 pm
Natural England:
Reply
10/8/2019 12:06:20 am
I totally agree this government body is definitely not fit for purpose. I thought they were there to protect flora and fauna what a bloody joke that is. They should be completely disbanded and a new caring body set up with people who actually have knowledge and a clear mandate not these fuckwits who are presently employed.
John Levey
10/8/2019 09:20:06 am
What I would like to know is where is the RSPB is in all this. They appear to be very quiet.
Jackie Butcher
10/8/2019 11:48:43 pm
How can they maintain the words "public body" when they have turned over the killing to a private business? Smoke, mirrors and lies. Disgusting isn't the word!
Romy Aa
9/8/2019 05:36:04 pm
They kill for the joy of killing.
Reply
jeannette brazier
9/8/2019 05:48:20 pm
I totally agree.
Suzanne
9/8/2019 07:34:05 pm
Lol yes I totally agree!! I thought natural england were there to protect nature not kill it. Awful people!!
Beth
9/8/2019 09:07:02 pm
Couldn't agree more. Who on earth wants to kill any bird, let alone an endangered species. Shoot the hunters and killers I say, let them have a taste of being terrorised.
Frances
9/8/2019 09:16:28 pm
I totally agree with Romy's comments too. Let the punishment fit the crime.
Sue
9/8/2019 05:52:01 pm
How utterly despicable but tragically all too common an attitude, that humans think they have the right to pick and choose what other species lives or dies. If another species causes a slight inconvenience to humans, then, of course we can’t have that can we so blast it out of existence !!!!!!
Reply
Robert
9/8/2019 07:38:37 pm
You took the words right out of my mouth. We are the over populated problem ,Its that simple
Beth
9/8/2019 09:08:55 pm
Couldn't agree more, we cause more problems on this planet than any other living thing. When we are going to be culled - nature will have it's way eventually.
Ellen
9/8/2019 09:13:53 pm
I totally agree with you, Sue. Humans see the world as theirs alone and kill everything which is in their way. To help the wildlife, Natural England and its ilk must be shut down and wildlife can be safer without such ‘help’. Save wildlife, save Earth!
Doris Stubbs
10/8/2019 04:36:05 pm
I totally agree. If only inhumane beings would stop interfering with wild life, nature would find its own level. We are the pollutants, destroyers and upset the balance of nature
Sue
9/8/2019 05:56:02 pm
Better to go back to source and penalise the people who are throwing food waste way into the wrong containers. there should be no food waste at all in landfill. Our only food waste tht is not compostable in a home composter is normally just fish skins and bones. Carcasses like chicken are simmered for stock and the bones then left for the fox - this is a country fox not an urban one and no problem to anyone. Only buy what you need and give yourself the size portion you nwant
Reply
Gerry
9/8/2019 07:59:08 pm
Feedback for Sue. I am guessing that you care about animals, from the comment listed. My feedback is to help you, not to criticise you. Cooked animal bones of any type should never be fed/left out for an animal. Why? The cooking/heating process breaks down some of the bone composition. It can lead to splintering into long sharp sections that can lodge in an animal's mouth or worse if ingested. The fox will probably take those bones away to gnaw at them. Depending on where they are left, they might be then picked up by a domestic dog or cat. Whatever the scenario, it is best avoided. Cooked meat bones should always be disposed of in the bin.
Chris Betts
10/8/2019 04:27:55 pm
Gerry is right! I also boil any animal bones (not that we eat much meat these days, but I do use free range/organic chicken sometimes), but then wrap them in newspaper and put them in the bin. I used to bury them, but something (fox, dog, cat, who knows?) would sometimes dig them up, so now they always go in the bin.
Doris Stubbs
10/8/2019 04:37:58 pm
A lot of wisdom written here and very well expressed.
Amanda Church
12/8/2019 07:57:44 pm
My granny used to gain numerous bowls of chicken soup from the carcass. The bones were boiled repeatedly, in a pressure cooker until they were soft enough to be smashed with a wooden spoon, which would release the red marrow for a really gamey soup. Eventually the bones were just a mass of soft bits, which wouldn't splinter and spear the back of the throat of any wild animal. Granny was marvellous at not wasting a thing. As far as composting the remains I found the following:
gill didlick
9/8/2019 06:10:07 pm
It would appear that there is nothing 'natural' about natural England. Killing our sea birds is absolutely disgraceful and this outfit need to be policed by a body who actually cares about out wildlife, not a load of seagull haters who would be happy to see them all dead.
Reply
Stephen Langton-Riley
31/8/2019 03:59:53 pm
Doris Stubbs, it is a disgrace that the wisdom and good expression you mention on here doesn't reside at the illiterate officials in NE and EA. Far too much power and regulation has been passed to unaccountable agencies for yuears and it is about time that wes reveresed and ministers politically held to account for their departments.
trev
9/8/2019 06:19:16 pm
It depends what you mean by "Illuminati" Amanda. There is a 'Dark Cabal' of Capitalists, Industrialists and Military seeking to control many aspects of Society (and Global human affairs) to their own benefit, based upon greed and corruption, but they are not the real 'Illuminati'. Remember it says on the Georgia Guidestones "leave room for nature".
Reply
Glynne Williams
9/8/2019 07:52:32 pm
What Natural England and the Environment Agency are failing to observe is that gulls have.come increasingly in-land because Man has destroyed fish stocks, the gulls' normal food. Gulls will go where the food source is. It is a scandal that we have landfill sites in the first place, and in the second that they are both unsightly, a major health hazard and open to the air. There must be a far better way of dealing with rubbish than this (apart from producing less of the stuff!)
Reply
Jill
10/8/2019 10:31:57 am
Glynne, you're absolutely right. Again a perfect example of man's lazy irresponsibility causing a problem which then our innocent wildlife suffers for. I can't understand why such significant numbers of people seem to be so stupid....
Judith Lucas
10/8/2019 02:11:42 pm
Absolutely. Humans are the ones causing the environmental problems, and we try to solve that by destroying innocent wildlife. What is wrong with burning waste to produce heating, which happens in some parts of the world? That would actually create another industry, and provide jobs.
Doris Stubbs
10/8/2019 04:42:48 pm
I agree 100% with this. We destroy and exploit natural food sources for animals and kill them when they have to find other sources. We humans are the scourge of the world.
Anne
9/8/2019 08:23:47 pm
It's absolutely evil. Thank you for everything you are doing
Reply
(Dr) Pedr Jarvis
11/8/2019 04:33:07 pm
Jill, if you have evidence of foxes breaking into houses and taking babies away, I shall be interested to see it. 9/8/2019 08:27:40 pm
The problem is not the gulls. The problem is 1,the easy availability of discarded food at the waste sites and 2, the ravaging of our seas, so that their natural food, fish, is scarce.
Reply
Timothy Hugh Walker
10/8/2019 01:42:28 am
So the Environment Agency state "Large numbers of Gulls is undesirable" Maybe I'll rub shoulders with the massed ranks of Herringe Gulls and shout "Large numbers of Humans is undesirable"!
Reply
Pete Yorke
10/8/2019 07:24:20 am
Isn't food waste supposed now to be processed as compost? If the local councils were doing there jobs effectively by ensuring food waste was properly recycled these landfill owners wouldn't have a gull or corvid problem in the first place...Why isn't Natural England putting pressure on councils and waste contractors to do their jobs with environmental sanity instead of issuing killing licences so thoughtlessly?!
Reply
(Dr) Pedr Jarvis
11/8/2019 04:35:35 pm
Be fair. Councils can only take away the rubbish we put out for them. It is up to us to put it out for them to collect.
sheila bridle
10/8/2019 09:16:06 am
I so agree with you on everything you have said and yes we do live in a wicked world
Reply
Gordon Stewart
10/8/2019 12:37:49 pm
I am bemused that the birds are designated as 'disease carriers' but this led me to question what kind of waste is going into landfill. If there are toxins being land filled aren't there regulations on specific disposal methods or is it left entirely to the operators to decide the health of our environment? The whole thing is shameful.
Reply
(Dr) Pedr Jarvis
11/8/2019 04:48:24 pm
Actual evidence of the spread of disease and the numbers of cases would be helpful.
Malcolm Hart
10/8/2019 02:54:31 pm
You’re not helping, Amanda.
Reply
Christine Bates
10/8/2019 03:09:17 pm
I'm lost for words, how can they call themselves " Natural England" . I saw a feeble answer to the campaign on TV but as always people are hardly ever challenged.
Reply
Fay Watson
10/8/2019 03:29:30 pm
I too am shocked at this awful situation. I agree with John Levey, who asks where are the RSCB? Why aren't they taking any action?
Reply
Catherine Hershaw
12/8/2019 08:23:49 pm
Natural England and the Environment Agency have shown (not for the first time) that they are interested only in enabling those in business, who want to maximise profit, to get rid of any creature that may 'cost them money' been the issue with foxes for years but this applies to every animal and bird in the same way. We need this information out there. Farmers and landowners 'Custodeans of our countryside?' For most only if there's an EU grant in it for them
Reply
Pat
21/8/2019 01:53:03 pm
Could we not lobby for a regulatory authority to be established which is manned by recognised (independently) environmental scientists who could sift through these spurious and ambiguous statements which mean nothing. We do not own wild life so why do they think they have the right to murder other sentient beings. There needs to be a body which overviews all wildlife - including badgers, wild boar deer. Culling wildlife is just a symptom of an out of sync. civilisation and is an ignorant, careless, vile response. If the seas were not being denuded of fish gulls would not need tod be looking elsewhere for food. Is this just the £cheap option again as with badgers.
Reply
Daniella McCarthy-Stewart
27/8/2019 08:27:32 pm
Absolutely Amanda.
Reply
ESTELLE CANO
9/8/2019 05:32:01 pm
Keep on digging, you're doing a brilliant job!
Reply
Mrs Amanda Cheadle
9/8/2019 05:33:37 pm
Hi. All this makes me wonder why there is all that waste food at landfill sites. It should be being composted, either at home by individuals, or collected separately by the council for composting.
Reply
Lyndon Jones
9/8/2019 05:50:08 pm
The points you bring about food not being composted and it attracting rats should b brought to the attention of the local authorities who control these sites and asking questions why is this happening and a copy letter to natural England and asking how many rats have been killed this is far more important than killing birds.
Reply
Milja Spruit
9/8/2019 08:28:19 pm
No animals should be killed, just like no human animals should be killed. If there are 'too many' individuals of a certain species, there is something wrong with the natural balance, so restore the balance. Need I say more? Less humans, no waste - that's what should have been done 50 years ago...
Squirrel Manning
10/8/2019 02:38:51 pm
Rats can be controlled via non-lethal methods too. Contrapest, a US product created by a company called Senestech, is a sweet-tasting birth control liquid irressistible to rats, which stops both males and females reproducing. 9/8/2019 06:04:29 pm
I edited www.WASTEBOOK.org from 1996-2006 - it's now an archive site with useful info (don't use contact details - they're out of date).
Reply
Deborah Hey-Smith
9/8/2019 05:39:58 pm
Birmingham has many seagulls who have created homes here after flying inland up the River Severn. I think you should keep an eye on what they do in Birmingham with the approach of the Commonwealth Games in 2022. They may want to cull them as they culled the pigeons which were prevalent when I first visited Birmingham and there are hardly anynow in the City Centre, where they used to give a whistling sound in the evening and could be fed like at Trafalgar Square.
Reply
David Oakley-Hill
9/8/2019 06:11:40 pm
Seagulls have been attracted inland in recent decades by human waste tips and because humans have overfished, taking the gull's natural food, & dumped plastic in the seas.
Reply
Derek Swift
9/8/2019 05:48:05 pm
Even if the statements given in the reply were true, which clearly they aren't, what possible reason can they offer for killing ravens and other corvids which remove carrion from our land and therefore diminish any risk of disease. And what possible excuse can ever be made for killing Blue Tits when by their nature only a tiny proportion of those hatched ever make it to adulthood.
Reply
Doreen smith
11/8/2019 01:27:45 pm
When will man ever learn, through the centuries culling of many species has taken place , then a few years later they have become extinct. If man left nature alone it would sought out things itself. We are killing this beautiful planet so don't need to to hire someone to shoot birds , other wild life are also being killed for man's greed.jj
Reply
Grace madden
9/8/2019 05:49:25 pm
I live in Ireland and just cannot comprehend what Natural England is doing to the Birds of the UK!!!
Reply
10/8/2019 12:18:07 pm
In answer to your question Grace.
Reply
(Dr) Pedr Jarvis
11/8/2019 04:54:58 pm
Please remember Natural England does not cover the UK ! There are other countries - Wales and Scotland.
Reply
Lori
9/8/2019 05:50:29 pm
I can only speak about the east coast of Lincolnshire and the Humber Estuary, but there does not seem to be anymore Herring Gulls but there is many less Black Headed Gulls. There are problems at Bempton Cliffs RSPB in Yorkshire, where Herring Gulls are causing problems for the Kittiwake.
Reply
Merlin Hay
9/8/2019 05:51:00 pm
I don't know about Cornwall, Dorset, etc, but here in North Somerset, we're not supposed to put food in general waste. We have separate food buckets for it & it goes for composting. Where does all this supposed food waste come from & exactly how much actual food is there? Maybe it's time for waste disposal to be regulated over the country as, at the moment, it seems to depend on who is collecting the waste as to where it goes. As usual, it's the filthy humans who are to blame, not the birds.
Reply
Tim Burke
9/8/2019 09:02:41 pm
I suspect that the EA were concerned that the landfill sites are badly run, in that food waste is readily accessible attracting gulls. If the food waste wasn't there, or failing that buried rapidly, the gulls wouldn't be there in excessive numbers.
Reply
Rebel Grandad
9/8/2019 09:49:14 pm
Merlin..here in Wokingham our food, recycling & general waste is collected by private company Veolia in one wagon. Like you, food waste is collected via a green bag in caddie & supposed to be sent to Oxford for production of methane gas to produce energy with by product used as fertilizer. Unfortunately when I'm able to watch waste operatives they place most of food, recycling with general waste into one of several of their wheelie bins that's then all placed into the general waste compartment, instead of going into 3 separate ones, ultimate laziness. Complain incessantly to WBC who say they'll be acting on my complaint but obviously don't. Suggested separate wagons, described culprits, asked them to go where wagons offload, send officials out covertly to see for themselves, even videoed what's going on but don't want to see footage! Now contemplating going to media. Utter complacency & couldn't care less attitude from authorities, would even save them money from infill tonnage. So here's one huge reason for food ending up in landfill if this is multiplied around the country and increased gull population. Not gulls fault that they like humans need to survive, humans are not killed for overpopulating. Also adds to the dessimation of our now fragile ozone.
Reply
Tina Cooper
9/8/2019 05:51:03 pm
Un Natural England, The Environment Destruction Agency, DEFRA, all linked. Follow more trails, the Parliamentary Under Secretary of State for Rural Affairs and Biosecurity, is Lord Gardiner of Kimble, who was a master & is still a member of the Kimblewick Hunt whose hounds had a large outbreak of bovine TB that they tried to hush up. Instead of banning all hunting in the area their hounds had potentially contaminated they invited other hunts in. George Eustice, avid supporter of the badger cull is Minister of State at DEFRA. All the science says it won't work but their only interest is kowtowing to the big landowners, business & The Countryside Alliance. The whole dept is rotten to the core.
Reply
Terry Canham
9/8/2019 05:51:51 pm
This is utterly appalling, however you look at it. The RSPB is deafeningly silent in this whole matter. I wonder, Jason, have you been in direct contact with them? I think I will. We have to get some support against this madness.
Reply
Clinton Edwards
9/8/2019 05:53:17 pm
So the Herring Gulls leave droppings all over the land as they scavenge for waste food on dump sites: we pump millions of gallons of effluent into the Herring gulls environment every day and have fished out, to the almost extinction, their natural food - Herrings.
Reply
David
9/8/2019 05:54:45 pm
Composting food waste is a great idea, but my pet hate is a much bigger problem which will always attract birds and vermin.I'm talking about the millions of soiled nappies dumped every week. How may thousands of gulls will be killed before a 'suitable' number is reached. This is totally unacceptable.
Reply
Lyla Byrne
9/8/2019 05:55:23 pm
Dear Jason - did you get and answer to this question?
Reply
Lance Moore
9/8/2019 05:58:07 pm
Do the Environment Agency also consider birds which follow ploughing and fishing boats as a risk? ?
Reply
Daphne Beale
9/8/2019 05:59:56 pm
I agree with Amanda. My first thought was that if there is so much waste food to attract gulls there must be a significant health hazard to anyone in the area. It also means there must be plenty to attract other vermin. The contract should include not exposing food waste in this way. When will we learn eat the food we grow or buy, not throw it in the waste bin. Most councils will provide bins to compost material that can be composted.
Reply
Owen Branley
9/8/2019 06:06:30 pm
The Beefeaters at the Tower of London have an interest in ravens. Have they been consulted about the cull of ravens?
Reply
David Chalcraft
9/8/2019 06:14:09 pm
I live near a landfill site, there are far too many herring gulls. They make a terrible noise 24 hours a day. I hate them. But, killing them is not the answer. They, like all wild animals, are searching for food, it is humans that provide that food for them. As somebody else wrote, there should not be food in these sites, it is irresponsible people who create this problem. I really would like to live in an area where there were no herring gulls, because of the noise and mess, but we do not have the right to kill them.
Reply
robert whybrow
9/8/2019 06:25:12 pm
(And quite why the Environment Agency has so much sway in the whole process is very questionable. ) The E A licences these waste sites . and i can tell you - they are about as good as natural england in my opinion, they are not - or do not monitor their operators sites very well- a site in the south east has been releasing plastic waste for past 10 to 15 years - a new waste site from MAR 2019 has been releasing polystyrene particles from its site - both these sites back on to a stream which flows into river- the E A tell me through my MP that they monitor these sites - . also there are a lot of gulls that fly around - and i have heard what i thought was bird scare'r , someone did say to me it sounded more like gun shoot as it was not regular , but its not easy to see in - after your info - i would guess probably a contractor.
Reply
robert whybrow
11/8/2019 03:04:52 pm
I had to contact Environment Agency again - and was amused to notice on their letter headed paper Environment Agency one side - on the other creating a better place for people and wildlife - i think both of these statements are questionable
Reply
Maureen Hart
9/8/2019 06:26:28 pm
This explains why so many people hate Gulls. So much so that one idiot racing up my road deliberately drove on to the kerb killing a Herring Gull feeding his chicks on the pavement. I had been feeding this gull for several years reporting his progress to the Group who had ringed him.
Reply
John
9/8/2019 06:54:41 pm
The Environment Agency don't appear fit for purpose - but like any large organisation, key positions often get filled by pen pushers, only willing to do the bare minimum.
Reply
Alex Ross
9/8/2019 06:58:40 pm
The licence was granted in 2010, about the time the Tories took over our democracy. The Tories have treated me and my partner who suffer with mental health issues absolutely awful compared to the previous Labour government so I'm afraid poor animals without a voice won't fair very well under their rule. After all, they are always trying to make the cruel "sport" of fox hunting legal and don't seem to take any action against those that do it illegally.
Reply
Maureen Hart
9/8/2019 07:02:47 pm
Somehow been unsubscribed so doing this to get back
Reply
Geoff Halpin
9/8/2019 07:27:02 pm
I Would Like To Know What Birds Have Had Licences Issued To them ?
Reply
Nicole
9/8/2019 07:59:35 pm
This is the craziness of modern thinking. We assemble a large amount of what gulls find irresistible in one place, viz. a land fill. When the gulls arrive, they are seen as the problem, not the landfill with all its contents exposed to the elements.
Reply
Peter
9/8/2019 08:10:57 pm
What on earth is this nonsense?
Reply
John Fermer
9/8/2019 08:20:46 pm
Some of these landfill sites have produced significant contributions to ornithological knowledge. For instance the Slaty Backed Gull that appeared in Essex a few years ago - the first ever recorded in the UK. Would our 'professional' operative be able to distinguish that from a Greater Black Back Gull, or a Caspian Gull from a Herring Gull from a Yellow Legged Gull? I think not.
Reply
Stephen Welch
9/8/2019 10:43:38 pm
Well done to Jason in persisting with this issue, despite government bodies (funded by the tax payer) apparently doing their best to conceal the evidence.
Reply
Stephen Welch
10/8/2019 01:20:57 am
>> gutter press stories...
Reply
10/8/2019 02:31:24 am
Well, it’s a loosing battle because for every one Gull killed another ten will arrive. Nothing goes to waste and this is nature’s disposal unit. These aren’t the only birds in the cross hairs. Also, seems to me that the person who has the license to kill is making a killing himself in the money he’s raking in on these cull’s. Whose killing who here? We, Jason, must keep up the pressure.
Reply
iain
10/8/2019 09:43:04 am
after this 'person' has shot these birds what does he do with the bodies? one expects he would gather them ALL up and dispose of them correctly, but I suspect he leaves them to rot and attract more birds to kill and so on ad nauseum
Reply
Lesley
10/8/2019 12:58:09 pm
Birds are not ours to terrorise, maim and murder. It's worrying that so many humans choose violence as a first position and seem to show little or no understanding, empathy or remorse. I hope the RSPB can step in and help put a stop to the killing - who can blame a bird for looking for food wherever he or she can find it. Mass 'culls' destabilise the population and the eco-system, and often a re-bound population increase is triggered afterwards to counter-balance the deaths. If drivers are complaining that they can't see when birds fly up in front of the lorries, perhaps they could slow down or stop for a just a few seconds and let the birds move away, rather than support murder on a large scale. The profit margins of the big companies owning environmentally disastrous landfill sites shouldn't be at the top of the agenda - these sites are toxic, release methane gas and leachate and pollute goundwater. Landfill sites should be got rid of, not birds.
Reply
10/8/2019 04:36:20 pm
I just got this in my inbox, about British trophy hunters killing endangered puffins, and it made me think of you:
Reply
Jeremy Nicoll
11/8/2019 09:33:48 am
Angelina; thanks for that. It's ruined my day, but opened my eyes...
Reply
David Bailey
12/8/2019 05:35:46 pm
There is simply not sufficient levels of education concerning wildlife. If there was then these indiscriminate slaughters would likely not happen. The very fact that gulls are referred to as 'seagulls' by the masses says it all. There needs to be more wildlife education in schools.
Reply
Chris Sellars
14/8/2019 01:10:31 am
The way to deal with these people is to shame them by publicising their activities in a high profile manner - I would suggest the mainstream media channels (TV and Radio), there must be some media personality ally out there who could take up the cause. The reason the licences are granted is because someone has brought a case and pestered the agency into action and no doubt there is money changing hands. If we make it more painful for the agency than those people pestering them for the licences, then they will be forced to take the more responsible and less painful route. People after all pretty much always take the path of least resistance.
Reply
Leave a Reply. |
If you appreciate what I write about, please consider showing your support by buying me a virtual coffee!
Click the button below! Thanks :) Archives
July 2023
|