Take your photography to the next level and beyond...

  • NEWS
  • REVIEWS
  • INSPIRATION
  • COMMUNITY
  • COMPETITIONS

Why not join for free today?

Join for Free

Your total photography experience starts here


PRIZES GALORE! Enter The ePHOTOzine Exclusive Christmas Prize Draw; Over £10,000 Worth of Prizes! Plus A Gift For Everybody On Christmas Day!

How can someone do this ...


lemmy 7 2.0k United Kingdom
25 Aug 2014 12:38PM

Quote: Unfortunately, birds get used to the noise and learn to ignore it!


Yes, they are far from stupid. Our local Tesco use recorded starling distress calls to keep them away but they soon suss that the sound in that location does not mean trouble and they come back.

I personally don't mind the starlings being around the supermarket. They are beautifully iridescent in sunlight and don't seem to create any great problem. But I don't run a supermarket so there's a lot I don't know.

Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

bugdozer 11 98 2
25 Aug 2014 3:00PM

Quote:Unfortunately, birds get used to the noise and learn to ignore it!

Yes, they are far from stupid. Our local Tesco use recorded starling distress calls to keep them away but they soon suss that the sound in that location does not mean trouble and they come back.

I personally don't mind the starlings being around the supermarket. They are beautifully iridescent in sunlight and don't seem to create any great problem. But I don't run a supermarket so there's a lot I don't know.



That backs up what I said. A stimulus without any consequences does not represent danger to birds, they can learn that it's not dangerous. When I talked about shotgun blasts I meant actually shooting at the gulls, not just making a noise. That prevents them learning that it's safe simply because it isn't. They will see the bang killing their fellows. Watching another bird die after eating bait will not have any effect on them as they can't link cause to effect like they could with a gun shot.
Whether the people "clearing the runway" by killing birds inhumanely were ordered to or not, the fact remains that it would not be as effective as most other methods. The person giving the orders to use that method was obviously the one who got a kick out of them suffering.
lemmy 7 2.0k United Kingdom
25 Aug 2014 3:36PM

Quote:Whether the people "clearing the runway" by killing birds inhumanely were ordered to or not,


I just love modern sensibilities. The people on the 2 sides were involved in inhumanely killing one another in their thousands. You think anyone would worry about some birds?

The idea, as I understood was not bird psychology but to destroy all the birds on the runway and area by feeding them bread with carbide. They fed and exploded and when enough had died the runway was clear enough to minimize the danger to the aircrews, since would take time for other birds to come into the area to fill the gap.

It seems to me another urban inanity to see the killing of birds by carbide as inhumane but shooting at them with a shotgun, inevitably wounding many of them as humane. If you know a nice way of killing large numbers of birds quickly, I'd be interested to know it. This was an RAF base on Stornoway in 1943. Negotiation with the birds was probably not possible in those days.
arhb e2
7 2.5k 68 United Kingdom
25 Aug 2014 3:45PM
There is a frame of mind amoungst those who live in seaside towns, that sea-gulls are a bloody nuisance, and this is perhaps a reason why these particular birds are persecuted.
I even recall this subject - not so much the spraying, being one of the topics on the awesomely boring Jeremy Vine show on lunchtime radio 2.

In response to Chris L, it can sometime be the opposite effect, where children are bought up in a rough and abusive household, where they see it as being normal to treat other humans or animals/birds in a similar way.
lemmy 7 2.0k United Kingdom
25 Aug 2014 3:57PM

Quote:There is a frame of mind amoungst those who live in seaside towns, that sea-gulls are a bloody nuisance


I lived in Hastings for a while and it was true that the gulls were a nuisance. The cause was people leaving their rubbish out in thin plastic bags which the gulls could easily rip, open bins and the love of the English for discarding their left-overs and garbage anywhere they happened to be standing or walking. The fishermen used to sling unused fish bits all over the beach, too but the gulls used to eat that which was a form of avian rubbish collection, really.

There's actually no sea-gull as such, they are just gulls that happen to live near the sea. There are just as many around west London where I live is anywhere else. Anyone who has ever been ****ped on by one of these birds will not forget it in a hurry Tongue
brian1208 e2
11 10.6k 12 United Kingdom
25 Aug 2014 4:07PM

Quote:There is a frame of mind amoungst those who live in seaside towns, that sea-gulls are a bloody nuisance, and this is perhaps a reason why these particular birds are persecuted


That and maybe the fact that they are dangerous (our coach driver on a trip to Brixham had his face ripped open by a gull, ending up in hospital having it stitched back up + anti-tetanus and penicillin injections) and also carry disease

as here
petebfrance 2 1.3k United Kingdom
25 Aug 2014 4:12PM

Quote:......Anyone who has ever been ****ped on by one of these birds will not forget it in a hurry Tongue

they do target-practice on the cars here - better than pigeons at it, I reckon.

Sign In

You must be a member to leave a comment.

ePHOTOzine, the web's friendliest photography community.

Join For Free

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more.