-
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.
Are Herring Gulls a threat to our bio-diversity? (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Gullplague
- Start date
Allen S. Moore
Well-known member
You seem really fixated on that. I bet you've never tried to survey nesting herring gulls!
Seabird 2000 was published in 2004, so not a 12 year old report. The data was gathered 1998-2002. Lots to read on the subject here I'm sure the OP will have read this, well I hope he has, but it does inform the debate.
But isn't the point here that Herring Gulls are native to the UK and unless you are someone who believes that we "have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth." then I don't think we should take a pick and mix attitude to the wildlife that surrounds us.
But isn't the point here that Herring Gulls are native to the UK and unless you are someone who believes that we "have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth." then I don't think we should take a pick and mix attitude to the wildlife that surrounds us.
DMW
Well-known member
You keep dismissing the Seabird 2000 report as being 12 years old and therefore out of date, yet simultaneously refer to papers from the mid 1990s (published 16 and 17 years ago) to support your argument. Just one example of the numerous inconsistencies and bias in your approach.
James Emerson
Norwich Birder
This quote is from the RSPBs Big School Birdwatch. It might make a nice snippet, but I really don't think that this should have any impact on national policy.
I love that! Gullplague picks up the negative side and does not look in a a balanced way. When you have a name like Gullplague it shows how negatively they view them. It can be very hard to convince someone who has quite clearly made up their mind.
If noise is a problem why not try and stop vehicle traffic which not only causes noise pollution but threatens biodiversity through pollution.
If noise is a problem why not try and stop vehicle traffic which not only causes noise pollution but threatens biodiversity through pollution.
Gullplague
Well-known member
Seabird 2000 is out of date and you can tell by the year in which it was undertaken,
The articles support the contention that the problem of overpopulation of the HG has been going on for some time and the government had notice that it would become a threrat to bio-diversity even before Seabird 2000 began.
This is not a problme that suddenly occured.
I am not sure what the "bias" is. Presenting a variety of articles from scholarly to newspapers who are quoting local health officers merely supports a contention that the gull population is not declining as DEFRA would have us believe.
The latest results from an actual survey carried out in the Severn Valley:
"I assessed Cheltenham in 2002 at 57 pairs. The possibility (based on that assessment) is that Cheltenham was first colonised between 1995-2000. In 2011 the bare minimum estimate was 306 pairs (the cherry picker wasn’t tall enough to get suitable views over most of the centre and suburbs). It may be over 500 pairs now. Gloucester, on the other hand, was first colonised in 1967 (3 pairs) and in 2002 I estimated 1,345 pairs and is likely to be over 3,000 pairs now. There are several other smaller colonies in Gloucestershire (Mitcheldean, Sharpness, Lydney, Stonehouse, Brockworth, Ashchurch, etc and yet another new colony in 2012 at Cinderford (5 pairs), all of which I’ve assessed. As for Brighton and the rest of the south coast all the way to London, I know that many of the towns are colonised and though I have no real idea about numbers, I suspect that several colonies are 1,000 pairs plus… In other words, you are both surrounded. It’s not just your street you need to be concerned about…"
What we need is a updated Seabird survey to stop DEFRA quoting their ancient report to the press and health officers everytime the matter gets raised.
IN the US, the government have taken a rational approach to the problem and are dealing with it. There is no denial because they bother to keep up with what is going on in the country and how gulls are impacting other life forms. Read the report and for ease of reference I have copied the sections covering areas where gulls are impacting bio-diversity (something the RSPB would never admit to):
http://seagullcontrol.com/BIZyCart....les.htm&THISGROUP=&CLIENT=SeaGull&ACCOUNT=990
"Managing Gull Damage."
Damage
----------------------------------------------------------------
1. Property
----------------------------------------------------------------
The fouling of boats and docks at marinas and accumulations of droppings on other property are common problems associated with gulls.
Rooftop nesting may result in accumulations of droppings, feathers and nesting material that may be drawn into buildings through air conditioning systems or plug roof drains during heavy rains.
Gulls may destroy polyurethane roofing materials , and boat and pool covers.
2. Natural Resources
----------------------------------------------------------------
Along the Atlantic Coast, herring and great black-backed gulls may negatively affect nesting populations of threatened, endangered, or special concern species of shorebirds.
Gulls have been shown to impact populations of terns, piping plovers, and other special concern species by direct predation on adults, chicks and eggs, and by disturbing nest establishment, feeding, and resting behaviors of shorebirds.
In many of these situations, the larger and more aggressive gulls have displaced shorebirds, and have limited their survival.
3. Agriculture
----------------------------------------------------------------
Gull depredation on fruit crops such as blueberries and grapes has been reported on Long Island and New Jersey, and can be a substantial cause of loss for individual farmers.
Gulls can also be attracted to cattle feedlots where there is an accessible source of food. In these situations, gull droppings may contaminate cattle food. Gull predation on domestic ducks at commercial duck farms and the transmission of disease to fingerlings at fish hatcheries are other problems associated with gulls.
4. Human Health and Safety
----------------------------------------------------------------
All gull species jeopardize aircraft safety when they are in or around airport environments and are involved in wildlife-aircraft collisions. Currently, more than one-half of all bird-aircraft strikes in the world involve gulls.
The ingestion of birds into aircraft engines has the potential to compromise human safety by causing engine failure and possible crash of the aircraft. In addition to this hazard, birdstrikes can cause substantial financial losses to the aviation community.
Gulls are attracted to airports by standing water, large areas of short grass along runways and taxiways, and by food resources, such as insects and handouts from people.
The creation of unsanitary conditions at reservoirs occurs when large flocks of gulls use areas for extended periods of time; accumulations of droppings and feathers can render water unfit for human consumption.
+++++++++++++++++++
Its time to wake up--force DEFRA to fund a survey and lets assess the problem before more damage is done by the gulls. We are not unique in the world in not having a gull population explosiion--we are just unique in our denial. End the bias toward preservation of gull numbers no matter what and have Seabird 2013 (with objective counters please--not in house RSPB people!).
Gullplague
Well-known member
The majority opinion in this country is that we have a plague of gulls. No local government or scientific report of recent origin points to a declining gull population in this country. Even the RSPB admit as much (see opening section in my PDF report). Hence "Gullplague." All it says is that there are too many of them and we need to wake up to that fact, call for an emergency survey* and stop quoting Seabird 2000 as if it was inspired literature.
It seems hard to convince many on here as most minds seem to be made up, just like DEFRA (although they are probably ducking the issue due to liability issues if it could be shown they know more than they admit). My suggestion is not to have already made your minds up but support the commission of an updated Seabird 2000. IN other words, lets be open minded until we know the true picture. As other nations are having problems and their goverments are acting on them lets be open minded and accept the possibility we may also have a problem that needs to be addressed.
*As in Survey, not as in "cull." Hard to believe anyone could object to having an up to date survey so that we can see what has happened in the country since 2000.
Last edited:
Gullplague
Well-known member
Its when you start to add all those snippets up that you begin to see a bigger picture. If its happening in X area lets be open to the possibility that it is also happening in Y. Every report I have included in my PDF points to the same trend--the RSPB have admitted to huge population growth is London and the Severn Estuary. Peter Rock carries out actual surveys in the Severn area and all his counts confirm remarkable turnarounds in gull populations (Rock is a bird enthusiast and does not call for culls--just information). The Scots are dealing with their population explosion and there is no reason why we in England should be immune from what is happening everywhere the HG (and similar) is to be found.
Lets all support a request to DEFRA to commission an updated Seabird--that is ALL I am asking of the bird enthusaists on this forum. DEFRA need to know it is in the best interests of all sections that the facts are ascertained.
dantheman
Bah humbug
Well, there was the matter of £400,000 mentioned, which could perhaps better be used elsewhere?
James Emerson
Norwich Birder
"The majority opinion in this country is that we have a plague of gulls"
- This is simply not true (or badly worded!). You haven't carried out any surveys or anything like that to know what the majority opinion of this country is. What you have done is picked out some articles highlighting areas where people perceive there is a problem.
"No local government or scientific report of recent origin points to a declining gull population in this country"
- Again the reports you keep linking to discuss the situation in certain towns or areas. It is quite possible (and indeed appears to be the case) that inland gull numbers are increasing but coastal gulls numbers are decreasing, and therefore there can still be an overall decrease, justifying red list status, which is based purely on change of numbers not a subjective decision.
"IN other words, lets be open minded until we know the true picture"
- You are asking people to be open-minded, yet all of your links are about places where people have an issue with gulls, and you insist on calling numbers of gulls a plague. That is why you have been accused of bias, that is why it is hollow asking us to be open-minded. If you wanted to be open-minded you could have called yourself "gullsurvey".
Your highlighted paragraph of an American study says that Herring Gulls may negatively affect shorebirds etc. None of the issues raised there apply to inland gulls. Have you found any studies that suggest Herring Gulls significantly affect biodiversity in urban colonies, which was an accusation you made in one of your first posts?
- This is simply not true (or badly worded!). You haven't carried out any surveys or anything like that to know what the majority opinion of this country is. What you have done is picked out some articles highlighting areas where people perceive there is a problem.
"No local government or scientific report of recent origin points to a declining gull population in this country"
- Again the reports you keep linking to discuss the situation in certain towns or areas. It is quite possible (and indeed appears to be the case) that inland gull numbers are increasing but coastal gulls numbers are decreasing, and therefore there can still be an overall decrease, justifying red list status, which is based purely on change of numbers not a subjective decision.
"IN other words, lets be open minded until we know the true picture"
- You are asking people to be open-minded, yet all of your links are about places where people have an issue with gulls, and you insist on calling numbers of gulls a plague. That is why you have been accused of bias, that is why it is hollow asking us to be open-minded. If you wanted to be open-minded you could have called yourself "gullsurvey".
Your highlighted paragraph of an American study says that Herring Gulls may negatively affect shorebirds etc. None of the issues raised there apply to inland gulls. Have you found any studies that suggest Herring Gulls significantly affect biodiversity in urban colonies, which was an accusation you made in one of your first posts?
Allen S. Moore
Well-known member
How do you know that it is "the majority opinion"? Has this statement been tested? You could ask people in a built up area where herring gulls are nesting, but that wouldn't give a result that can be extrapolated to the whole country.
From what information I have gathered over the years, although the populations of some rare birds are assessed every year, some other bird species are surveyed every 5 or even 10 years. Seabirds (including gulls) are surveyed at longer intervals, given the difficulty of visiting many of their nesting colonies. It is all down to money and the availability of time for people who can do the work safely and accurately. For example, I am involved with research into the chough in the Isle of Man and we tie in surveys with those in the UK. International chough censuses, which also included the Irish Republic and Brittany, were in 1982, 1992 and 2002. However, the chough census has not yet been carried out at this level so far this decade because of funding unavailability. (I mention that as an example of how the financial crisis is affecting ornithological survey work, but hopefully the next chough census will be in the not too distant future).
If your contacts in the UK government want to find funding for a survey of breeding herring gulls, that might find the answers that you are looking for. I say "might" because if only roof nesting gulls are surveyed, that would not show whether the population as a whole is increasing or decreasing. It would just produce a baseline for the population of roof nesting gulls.
Gullplague
Well-known member
Your opening comment highlights one of the problems. There are no comprehensive up-to-date surveys. All of the articles in my PDF show that the opinion of everyone is that gull numbers are and have been on the increase. The only report I have of an actual recent count is from Peter Rock who carried out survey in the Severn estuary (it too points to an increase):
I assessed Cheltenham in 2002 at 57 pairs. The possibility (based on that assessment) is that Cheltenham was first colonised between 1995-2000. In 2011 the bare minimum estimate was 306 pairs (the cherry picker wasn’t tall enough to get suitable views over most of the centre and suburbs). It may be over 500 pairs now. Gloucester, on the other hand, was first colonised in 1967 (3 pairs) and in 2002 I estimated 1,345 pairs and is likely to be over 3,000 pairs now. There are several other smaller colonies in Gloucestershire (Mitcheldean, Sharpness, Lydney, Stonehouse, Brockworth, Ashchurch, etc and yet another new colony in 2012 at Cinderford (5 pairs), all of which I’ve assessed. As for Brighton and the rest of the south coast all the way to London, I know that many of the towns are colonised and though I have no real idea about numbers, I suspect that several colonies are 1,000 pairs plus… In other words, you are both surrounded. .../
We simply do not know how many gulls there are, coastal or inland. The reports I have included are from all regions and many on the coast and they are consistent in finding an increase in numbers. The same applies to all the reports form around the world--especially in the US where the problem is both coastal and inland.
The reason all my articles point to an increase in gull numbers is because there are no reports, to my knowledge, pointing to a decrease (except Seabird 2000 and quotes of that report that are still being used by RSPB as if it were current data).
I have used the moniker "Gullplague" because it is based on the many articles I have reaqd on the subject. If I had found one article pointing to a declining gull piopulation I might have added a "?" after the name. But all I found were articles poiting to a plague in the sense of large and dangerous numbers of herring (and similar) gulls. Again, the excpetion in the world being Seabird 2000 which seems to be the Gospel According to DEFRA. I simply do not trust the government with this and a few other things too!
If every member of this forum signed off on a petition to DEFRA to commission another Seabird it would be hugely beneficial (to all those who do not fear the facts). We would then know the truth and if there is a problem we can find solutions.* But to bury our heads like the non-flying Osterich is not the best way to deal with it. There is more than enough evidence, if not a mountain's worth, to justify another gull survey.
_______________
*Peter Rock is not an advocate for culling but suggests all other methods have so far proven to be ineffective as the HG is resilient to all tried deterrents and adapts to anything "thrown at it." It has no predators and can breed in non-natural habitats whcih are rapidly becoming "natural", i.e., rooftops along the coast and inland.
Robin Edwards
Well-known member
"The majority opinion in this country is that we have a plague of gulls"
I'm now in the majority opinion that this thread is a wind-up.
The majority of people in Britain gullplague don't know much about gulls other than they expect to see them at the seaside.
If you gullplague visited a working refuse tip, would you form an opinion that the gulls were at plague proportions?
I guess a well-balanced piece of scientific research will get the result you're looking for?
I'm now in the majority opinion that this thread is a wind-up.
The majority of people in Britain gullplague don't know much about gulls other than they expect to see them at the seaside.
If you gullplague visited a working refuse tip, would you form an opinion that the gulls were at plague proportions?
I guess a well-balanced piece of scientific research will get the result you're looking for?
Attachments
Gullplague
Well-known member
I say "majority opinion" because there are no reports, to my knowledge, where the numbers of gulls are shown to be in decline.
You highlight the key problem area: funding.
Peter Rock estimates around £400k to carry out a satellite assisted survey and this is tiny compared with the MILLIONs that are being spent on nets, plastic owls, lasers, egg oilers and hawks. DEFRA and RSPB still recommend these ineffective methods and it is causing our local government to waste taxpayers money.
I am pressing Parliament through a small group of MPs to pressure DEFRA to fund another Seabird Survey. I am also suggesting local goverment chip in as it is a tiny sum of money divided by the dozens of local councils who are crying out (literally) for relief from the gull plague. Everyone feels strapped by DEFRA and their Seabird 2000 which triggered the RSPB to suggest the "redlist" in 2009--albeit based on data that was then already out of date. Birdlife say the HG is not endangered anywhere but I am not sure where they are getting their data for the UK unless they are assuming that we are like all other nations in seeing a gull increase or certainly not a decline :
http://www.birdlife.org/datazone/speciesfactsheet.php?id=3227
BirdLife International is a Partnership of 117 national conservation organisations and the world leader in bird conservation.
Herring Gull
The population trend is not known, but the population is not believed to be decreasing sufficiently rapidly to approach the thresholds under the population trend criterion (>30% decline over ten years or three generations). The population size is extremely large, and hence does not approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the population size criterion (<10,000 mature individuals with a continuing decline estimated to be >10% in ten years or three generations, or with a specified population structure). For these reasons the species is evaluated as Least Concern.
BirdLife International is a Partnership of 117 national conservation organisations and the world leader in bird conservation.
Herring Gull
The population trend is not known, but the population is not believed to be decreasing sufficiently rapidly to approach the thresholds under the population trend criterion (>30% decline over ten years or three generations). The population size is extremely large, and hence does not approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the population size criterion (<10,000 mature individuals with a continuing decline estimated to be >10% in ten years or three generations, or with a specified population structure). For these reasons the species is evaluated as Least Concern.
James Emerson
Norwich Birder
I know and agree that there are no whole-country, recent surveys. The reason is presumably the amount of work and cost required. We do agree on this!
My issue with your comment was that it was factually wrong. You cannot extrapolate the opinions of groups of people in areas where gulls are a problem into the majority of the population without evidence.
Newspapers love articles on swarms, plagues, violent animals etc. What doesn't sell newspapers are articles saying "there aren't many gulls in our city" or "there has been a decrease in species X". These only make the papers as a result of press releases after large scale surveys. Therefore it is not surprising that there are lots of alarmist articles about gulls and few about declining populations.
If the government decides to stump up the £400,000 or however much it will cost to do a complete survey of gull numbers then great. Just be aware that the survey may well show that overall the population of the Herring Gull has decreased since 2000, despite increases in urban areas.
I feel that the thread is going to just go around in circles, and have decided that this will be my last post in it. It has been interesting reading your various links, as a final comment I hope that whatever information a prospective gull survey returns, it can be looked at objectively and in a proper national context.
All the best,
James
DMW
Well-known member
You aren't sure where the bias is? Well, how about your post below for starters. Actually, this isn't just biased, it is deliberately misleading. Your selective use of bold text and subsequent commentary give the impression that BirdLife accepts there is no global decline in Herring Gull populations, when the BirdLife summary actually states that there is no evidence to suggest that there is a decline sufficient to warrant upgrading its conservation status.
When you intentionally mis-quote sources to make them fit your argument, you have zero credibility.
When you intentionally mis-quote sources to make them fit your argument, you have zero credibility.
Gullplague
Well-known member
Do we ever have a responsibility to manage the environment? We have had plenty of culls for:
Rats, pidgeons and badgers. All supported by the "science" of the day. Allow badgers to multiply too much and they kill off the cattle. Too many pidgeons and you get too much disease. Too many gulls.......
Same applies to the plant world: Japanese pond weed for example. Leave it and you lose your ponds and waterways in a few years.
We create wetlands to enhance birdlife--the goverment has recently done this. The US spend vast sumsn on creating new wetlands (one of the reports says how the HG is already ruining one of the new projects by predation against smaller species).
Bio-diverity has to be managed whether we like it or not. It is our responsibility to protect certain species such as Rhinos by arresting or even culling poachers. So why not protect the swallows in Rome by cutting back on Gull numbers? We cannot cherry pick and give the HG red list protection if there is a problem with this bird in relation to numbers and if (if) it is a threat to our bio-diversit.
Last edited:
DMW
Well-known member
You are seriously suggesting that a couple of articles written on an Italian tourist website should be given credibility as sources? It also referred to gulls catching swifts on the wing, which would be close to physically impossible. And how would culling urban gulls in the UK protect Roman swallows?
Can I ask what previous interest / experience you have in promoting biodiversity? What other projects have you been involved with?
