Dundee City Council Culling Methods

Question

Horrified to see this, called the council whereby I was LAUGHED AT over the phone and told me they are a pest and they had to do it. 
 I argued that the methods used were awful and said that it had upset me. The line then went dead! 
 What can be done about this, any ideas? 
 http://www.eveningtelegraph.co.uk/output/2010/07/07/story15339253t0.shtm

LRB · Accepted Answer

All UK wild bird species are protected by law under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981, and in Scotland there are slight differences which come under the Nature Conservation (Scotland) Act 2004. This makes it an offence to take, injure or destroy a bird, it's nests, eggs or young. However, some (named) species can be killed (including destruction of eggs, nests and young) under the terms of a General Licence, in certain circumstances. These would be: to preserve or protect public health and safety, air safety (near airports), or to prevent serious damage to livestock, food for livestock or crops. This is explained in full in this document. 
 Killing gulls for making a mess, being noisy or a 'nuisance' are not acceptable reasons for killing adults and chicks using the Licence. Before a General Licence (in Scotland, issued by Scottish Natural Heritage (SNH) - 01463 725000 ) can be used for any of the above reasons, all non-lethal methods of control must have been tried and shown to be ineffective or impracticable. These could include deterrents such as spikes or wires (to prevent roosting) or audible/sonic deterrents. 
 When a Licence is used to legally control birds, they must be killed, or 'dispatched' humanely, otherwise conditions of the Licence are broken, making the actions illegal. 
 In most cases, councils are avoiding the real issue with gulls - the rise in complaints about gulls has massively increased over the last 20 years and this rise is completely associated with the greater availability of fast food and cheap food sources. Gulls will eat from multiple food sources including waste food in urban areas (fast food and refuse), landfill sites, deliberate feeding by the public and natural food such as fish, invertebrates, molluscs etc. The most effective control measures involve reducing the availability of food and deterring them from nest sites (with spikes etc). However, this is not an instant solution, and requires planning and action well ahead of the nesting season - something that councils tend to forget until it's too late. Because most gull-related problems are confined to the breeding period, and because gulls always return to the same breeding site each year, once access to a breeding area has been blocked and the area protected with deterrents, the gulls will permanently move elsewhere. As with the pigeon, the pest control industry has seen the benefit of trying to exploit this man-made problem, as has the media, with horror stories about gull &lsquo;epidemics&rsquo; and the dangers to human health. Fortunately, however, the gull is a protected species of bird and pest control companies cannot use highly profitable lethal controls on gulls as they do to excess with the pigeon. As a result the numbers of gulls currently occupying urban areas is still relatively low, certainly relative to the pigeon, and other than in coastal areas gull-related problems are mainly confined to the breeding period. Gulls can be controlled very effectively and without using any invasive control techniques commonly employed by the pest control industry. Individual buildings can be protected comprehensively by using a combination of deterrents and anti-roosting products, and alongside complimentary controls such as egg-oiling, which can be considered for areas where gulls are breeding in numbers.( PiCAS )