Touty
Well-known member
Article on the men of Ness who still hunt Gannets on Sula Sgeir:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,,1833731,00.html
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,,1833731,00.html
-
Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.
Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
Salted Gannet anyone? (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Touty
- Start date
Capercaillie71
Well-known member
I can't imagine they taste too good, but then they like Stornoway black pudding over there as well, so there's no accounting for taste.
Several years ago, I read a story about someone in the Western isles who had (legally) acquired a freshly dead red-throated diver and decided to eat it. Apparently that tasted disgusting too.
Several years ago, I read a story about someone in the Western isles who had (legally) acquired a freshly dead red-throated diver and decided to eat it. Apparently that tasted disgusting too.
Docmartin
Thought Police
Touty said:
Interesting that the hunt is described as sustainable. This is not so according to the mnost recent information
Wanless et al. 2005. The status of Northern Gannet in Britain and Ireland 2003/4. British Birds 98, 280-294.
Basically all gannet colonies are thriving but
'...one colony, Sula Sgeir, stands out as showing a substantial decrease in numbers. This is the only colony where harvesting of chicks for human consumption is still permitted. 33,690 young were taken between 1985 and 2001. It seems likely that additional chicks must die through falling off the ledges or being unable to get back to the nests during the intense and prolonged disturbance that must inevitably occur during the hunt. ... the harvest represents about 30% of the annual production of chicks. Moreover, since the licence returns have remained constant, the proportion of chicks harvested will be increasing as the population decreases. There are no other obvious colony-specific threats to the Gannets of Sula Sgeir so the guga hunt appears to be the most likely cause of the lack of growth of this colony.'
And they taste like crap. Even the smell gives me the dry boke.
Evanji Axu
Spiteful Cynic
Fish by itself tastes good. Chicken by itself is my absolute favorite meat (Yes, I eat meat. Le gasp!). The two together? Nuh-uh.
Capercaillie71
Well-known member
Docmartin said:
That's interesting Docmartin. I'd always believed the stuff about it being sustainable, but this certainly seems to explode that myth. 30% seems to be a very high proportion to take. If it must continue, surely they could revise the license to substantially reduce the numbers taken.
Docmartin said:
Exactly, but that's the 'wee Frees' for you 3
. This "tradition" was from a time when people would have eaten dried and salted dog tollies as food was so scarce. Same on St Kilda, the seabirds being a viable source of protein. However, you would not 'choose' to eat guga over chicken or another waterfowl. Fair play to them in the past, but do they need to do it now ?
My granadad and uncle used to harvest gulls eggs at Arbroath cliffs in the 40's and 50's because they were too poor to buy chicken eggs. Nowadays there is no need for that in this country.
2000 chicks from a breeding population of 8000 pairs seems a helluva amount to me, not allowing for 'natural' pressures ?
I can't see how it is an expression of one's cultural identity that has any relevance in Scotland (or Britain) today. Does a third generation Lewisman living in New Zealand really need to be sent a guga to remind him of 'home'
( would it get through their customs ! ) ? Half of them probably haven't even been 'home'. If that is what their culture is reduced to, then they have no culture at all. It seems to me like a 'community' of people trying to convince themselves how different they all are from the rest of us. Don't we know it.
RSPB need to change their tone on this, but are probably trying to avoid being sucked into cultural politics with the new "Tartan Executive", which seems to rubber stamp anything remotely "Scottish" in interest these days.
Rant over.
Xenospiza
Distracted
Puffin is allegedly requested by Björk on her rider... and a recipe is here (by someone who doesn't like it):
http://www.isholf.is/gullis/jo/meats.htm#lundi
A Lewisman in New Zealand should catch his own Antipodean gugas! Or settle for muttonbirds (shearwater chicks) instead...
http://www.isholf.is/gullis/jo/meats.htm#lundi
A Lewisman in New Zealand should catch his own Antipodean gugas! Or settle for muttonbirds (shearwater chicks) instead...
London Birder
Well-known member
I know the Gaviiadae are utterly knock-out but one look at a Red-throated surely say's 'I taste crap' ...
citrinella
Well-known member
Hmm. I'm going to stick up for the men of Ness - in the meantime. Why should outsiders interfere in their tradition ? The only argument for which critics have any evidence is that of sustainability. I am surprised at Wanless describing Sula Sgeir as the only colony with a declining population, as the same paper describes a 15% decline on Ailsa Craig since the last census.
In Sula Sgeir's case, the population is a small fragment of the Scottish gannet population. It may be declining now, but it has risen in the past even with guga collection. It would be extraordinary if it remained stable for any long period, one would expect downward as well as upward fluctuations. A smaller colony could be expected to show more variation, but even St.Kilda has declined slightly. If Sula Sgeir declines very much and continues to do so it will be very evident to the locals who will probably restrain themselves. It is certainly far too early to interfere.
As for this matter of tasting awful, taste is acquired for many things. If those of you arguing that guga hunting should be banned on the basis of taste being awful had been born on St.Kilda 150 years ago you would most likely have a very different view of their taste.
The Lewisach have not been shouting at the government to ban everything except church-going on Sunday throughout the UK, you would probably be somewhat incensed at the idea of an "outsider" imposing their beliefs on you. I am sure they see this the same way - and with justification. The belief that the majority is always "right" is a spurious by-product of democracy.
Going back to the argument about sustainability. How many of us can claim to live sustainable lives ? It's a bit rich slinging mud at the folk of Ness for an activity that may or may not be sustainable (long term) when most of us have lifestyles which are many times less sustainable. Take the plank from your own eye before you try to remove the speck from your brother's.
I'll get my coat <s>
Mike.
P.S. I am an atheist ;-)
In Sula Sgeir's case, the population is a small fragment of the Scottish gannet population. It may be declining now, but it has risen in the past even with guga collection. It would be extraordinary if it remained stable for any long period, one would expect downward as well as upward fluctuations. A smaller colony could be expected to show more variation, but even St.Kilda has declined slightly. If Sula Sgeir declines very much and continues to do so it will be very evident to the locals who will probably restrain themselves. It is certainly far too early to interfere.
As for this matter of tasting awful, taste is acquired for many things. If those of you arguing that guga hunting should be banned on the basis of taste being awful had been born on St.Kilda 150 years ago you would most likely have a very different view of their taste.
The Lewisach have not been shouting at the government to ban everything except church-going on Sunday throughout the UK, you would probably be somewhat incensed at the idea of an "outsider" imposing their beliefs on you. I am sure they see this the same way - and with justification. The belief that the majority is always "right" is a spurious by-product of democracy.
Going back to the argument about sustainability. How many of us can claim to live sustainable lives ? It's a bit rich slinging mud at the folk of Ness for an activity that may or may not be sustainable (long term) when most of us have lifestyles which are many times less sustainable. Take the plank from your own eye before you try to remove the speck from your brother's.
I'll get my coat <s>
Mike.
P.S. I am an atheist ;-)
citrinella said:
Its called freedom of speech and the right to express an opinion. It is happening in my country and I don't like it. It is unnecessary and disruptive. I recall a certain faction of the "sporting" community who dress up in red coats and ride about on horses losing the right to their "tradition" because the vast majority of people didn't support it.
The Maltese have a "tradition" of massacring millions of migrating birds. So as an "outsider" you are saying I don't have a right to object. If you are arguing the same stance for the men of Ness as an expression of "tradition" and "culture" then you must also support Maltese hunters ? Get real.
That is what I said if you read my post. But.... choice of boiled Puffin or Sainsbury's Chicken Madras........mmm tough choice. Not. People ate these things because that was all there was to eat when there was no fish, period. Now they simply don't need to do it. Also, no-one here is saying it should be banned because they taste awful. As you say it was 150 years ago, lets leave it in the past as it has no relevance today. It should be remembered but not 're-enacted'.
So Stalinist Russia was better ? We are a democratic country, apparently.
Nice biblical metaphor for a supposed aetheist. I am however insulted by the rhetoric of your comment which infers that my own lifestyle is more environmentally negative than those of the Men of Ness. You know nothing about me. I do not equate living sensibly and responsibly as I do ( as well as working positively in areas of conservation research) with people who harvest birds unnecessarily just because they can, and as an expression of their so called 'culture'.
Maybe you better take your coat.
Last edited:
Though an 'outsider' myself, so shouldn't be poking my nose in (according to the world as seen by Citrinella), I couldn't have said it better Griffin, spot on.
ESTEBANNIC
Well-known member
griffin said:
I couldn't agree more. This tradition is totaly unneccesary. The Balearic Shearwater was wiped out from most Balearic islands, and their breeding grounds reduced to a few unaccessable islets. A few decades ago they were on the brink of extinction. Of course, during the last few centuries the islanders then didn't really have much choice as there was a lot of poverty and not much else around to eat except fat Shearwater chicks. This situation must have had a few things in common with the situation the Scottish villagers encountered that made them have to harvest the Gannets. Things have changed a great deal since then and with "survival" left out of the equation the only things that come to mind are "sport" and "fun". These concepts are then passed for "tradition". :storm:
Last edited:
jpoyner
Well-known member
Although I am totally in favour of maintaining traditions, I don't think that our ancestors filled their boats with crates of Tennents Super and bags of crisps, had one big p**s up then returned leaving the cans scattered to the winds.
The fact that SNH still grant a licence for this mindless slaughter party is a disgrace to scottish wildlife conservation.
JP
The fact that SNH still grant a licence for this mindless slaughter party is a disgrace to scottish wildlife conservation.
JP
Last edited:
citrinella
Well-known member
Many people expressed strong support for Griffin when he referred to "freedom of speech". I have no problem with that, am grateful that I can answer equally freely. What I objected to was interference - the imposition of a ban - from outside and I emphasize that I said "in the meantime". We should first encourage the men of Ness to ensure that their practice remains sustainable themselves. Comments made on democracy ignore my inclusion of the word "always" in "The belief that the majority is always "right" is a spurious by-product of democracy." I did not say that the majority is necessarily "wrong", just that it might err sometimes. I also put the "right" in quotes deliberately. More often than not the situation re right and wrong is not at all clear cut.
Griffin said
"I am however insulted by the rhetoric of your comment which infers that my own lifestyle is more environmentally negative than those of the Men of Ness. You know nothing about me."
I apologize - I certainly did not intend to insult anyone. The comment was not directed at you, or anyone, personally. I do stand by my comment that "Most of us" live an extremely unsustainable lifestyle. I heard a report that the UK uses up all it's annual production of resources by about March each year. The rest of the year is lived on resources which are not being replaced. If that is the average position for UK citizens, there cannot be many who are living anything like sustainable lifestyles.
Griffin pointed out a "Nice biblical metaphor for a supposed aetheist." Yes, deliberate ;-) Atheism need not imply any lack of moral principles.
Griffin also said "The Maltese have a "tradition" of massacring millions of migrating birds. So as an "outsider" you are saying I don't have a right to object." You do. Again, is the situation as clear cut as the sensational press makes out ? One of my most respected ecologist friends reckons that hunting during the autumn migration will have almost no effect at all, as losses between autumn migration and next year's breeding are so high anyway. In other words - the birds killed by hunters during the autumn migration would almost certainly have died anyway. The spring migration is a different matter. In economic terms autumn hunting could be very important too - as many of those dead birds might otherwise have been killed and used to profit by very poor Africans. The situation in Malta is also much more complicated, and dangerous, because it covers a wide range of species from many different populations almost all, if not all, of which are not well monitored. In a situation like that, where we cannot know the effect, there is far greater justification for caution.
Interesting that Estebannic should criticize the Ness men for enjoying "sport" and "fun" in the same paragraph that he reminds me about the Balearics. I guess that sport and fun as practised by many visitors to the Balearics would not be appreciated too much in Lewis (or many other places). But that is socially acceptable ?
jpoyner doesn't think "that our ancestors filled their boats with crates of Tennents Super and bags of crisps, had one big p**s up then returned leaving the cans scattered to the winds." Accepting the metaphor - indeed, but these things happen most days in most towns in the UK. My farm is regularly littered with beer cans and crisp packets (and a lot more). Why should that be used as an excuse for banning the collection of guga ?
The central question, the only justifiable reason for banning the harvesting of guga, would be that it is doing serious long term damage to the population. At the moment, I'd argue with Wanless and say that the jury is out, that we should wait and see. We have a good monitoring system in place; we are aware of the situation; we have the tools available to control the situation; and the population on Sula Sgeir is still very healthy. I do not think the situation is dangerous enough to warrant pre-emptive action.
I still say "wait and see".
Mike.
Griffin said
"I am however insulted by the rhetoric of your comment which infers that my own lifestyle is more environmentally negative than those of the Men of Ness. You know nothing about me."
I apologize - I certainly did not intend to insult anyone. The comment was not directed at you, or anyone, personally. I do stand by my comment that "Most of us" live an extremely unsustainable lifestyle. I heard a report that the UK uses up all it's annual production of resources by about March each year. The rest of the year is lived on resources which are not being replaced. If that is the average position for UK citizens, there cannot be many who are living anything like sustainable lifestyles.
Griffin pointed out a "Nice biblical metaphor for a supposed aetheist." Yes, deliberate ;-) Atheism need not imply any lack of moral principles.
Griffin also said "The Maltese have a "tradition" of massacring millions of migrating birds. So as an "outsider" you are saying I don't have a right to object." You do. Again, is the situation as clear cut as the sensational press makes out ? One of my most respected ecologist friends reckons that hunting during the autumn migration will have almost no effect at all, as losses between autumn migration and next year's breeding are so high anyway. In other words - the birds killed by hunters during the autumn migration would almost certainly have died anyway. The spring migration is a different matter. In economic terms autumn hunting could be very important too - as many of those dead birds might otherwise have been killed and used to profit by very poor Africans. The situation in Malta is also much more complicated, and dangerous, because it covers a wide range of species from many different populations almost all, if not all, of which are not well monitored. In a situation like that, where we cannot know the effect, there is far greater justification for caution.
Interesting that Estebannic should criticize the Ness men for enjoying "sport" and "fun" in the same paragraph that he reminds me about the Balearics. I guess that sport and fun as practised by many visitors to the Balearics would not be appreciated too much in Lewis (or many other places). But that is socially acceptable ?
jpoyner doesn't think "that our ancestors filled their boats with crates of Tennents Super and bags of crisps, had one big p**s up then returned leaving the cans scattered to the winds." Accepting the metaphor - indeed, but these things happen most days in most towns in the UK. My farm is regularly littered with beer cans and crisp packets (and a lot more). Why should that be used as an excuse for banning the collection of guga ?
The central question, the only justifiable reason for banning the harvesting of guga, would be that it is doing serious long term damage to the population. At the moment, I'd argue with Wanless and say that the jury is out, that we should wait and see. We have a good monitoring system in place; we are aware of the situation; we have the tools available to control the situation; and the population on Sula Sgeir is still very healthy. I do not think the situation is dangerous enough to warrant pre-emptive action.
I still say "wait and see".
Mike.
Farnboro John
Well-known member
citrinella said:
I agree with every point, Mike.
Start talking right and wrong about eating meat and you will end up teaching Orcas to like kelp (bet they think it tastes awful). Plenty of stuff I don't like the taste of, but I don't tell others they can't eat it on that account.
Harvest sustainable - OK: harvest unsustainable - find new balance point and continue (or if necessary, pause).
John
Evanji Axu
Spiteful Cynic
On that note, I'm surprised PETA hasn't tried to get people to feed their dogs vegan diets.
