How can we justify the protection of this species where/when they nest 'too close' to an urban population for their own security?
'OK'! I blame the fisheries (fishermen) for leading herring gulls to our ports and land regions, but the fact that we protect this species means that we also 'protect' the 'species' without condition.
I'm currently faced with a ground 'nest' at my front door. That's OK in that I don't need to use this means of transit as I have a 'side door' that I can use. However, that ingress/exit takes me within 4ft of the ground nest which also invokes an 'aggressive attitude' from the 'parenting/nesting couple' for this ground-space. I avoid this 'agression' by feeding the couple with an acceptable form of food (white fish) at an optimal time during their occupation. I should 'not' need to do this to safely enter/exit my home! These raptors can inflict injury that may induce a bacterial/viral infection where/when a 'broken skin' scenario evolves from a confrontational encounter, so how are they not 'vermin' in this scenario?
That said, this nesting couple isn't likely to be sucsesful in their endeavour to procreate due to the local population of urban fox.
How can anyone manage this scenario without the implication of the £2,000 fine for nesting disruption, or the added cost/inconvenience of cohabitation with this species. Many of us can't afford to 'live' with this 'inconvenience'.
Kind regards, Ray.
The law involving gulls like other parts of wildlife law it’s not straight forward and can be complex. As a last resort action can be taken. Each complaint is taken on a case by case and is not straight forward. I’m just stating what the present law is. I take a pragmatic approach to wildlife conservation and I don’t get over sentimental. Complaints about Herring Gulls are taken on a case by case sinario. But as I said I never get over sentimental about certain parts of conservation. In some cases in exceptional circumstances, even by wildlife UK Conservation organisations, have at times at times have had to humanely cull. Such as at Leighton Moss. The Deer have damaged the Reeds in the past and in those circumstances have had to be controlled. In the distant past Grey Seal had to be humanely culled on the Farne Islands to protect some of the rarer birds by the National Trust. At Minsmere the Gull colonies on the scrape at Minsmere where taken over with the Avocets at risk and other birds affected as well. So the RSPB have put in the past put something put into the eggs to be made infertile to keep the gull population down to a reasonable level. And that has to be done at times. And sadly I agree with that!
I forgot to send this for anyone who might not of seen the thread about the issue as me and Seaman. but this is the thread that has some details of the situation also. he did contact the RSPB to ask how to go about it https://community.rspb.org.uk/wildlife/f/photography/279435/herring-gull/1391167#pifragment-4285=1
In reply to DartRay:
In reply to Zo Clark:
We spend 90% of net income on conservation, public education and advocacy
The RSPB is a member of BirdLife International. Find out more about the partnership
© The Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB) is a registered charity: England and Wales no. 207076, Scotland no. SC037654
Accepting all non-essential cookies helps us to personalise your experience
These cookies are required for basic web functions
Allow us to collect anonymised performance data
Allow us to personalise your experience