Agenda item

The Panel has requested an update regarding action being taken to mitigate the impacts of urban gulls in Bath and North East Somerset.

The Neighbourhood Environment Manager and the Environmental Protection Manager gave a presentation to the Panel on this item. A summary is set out below.

No magic wand: There is no simple solution to the gull issue.  The impacts of urban gulls are felt up and down the country and local authorities are using a range of methods to try and mitigate the problem.  In the absence of dedicated research we have no guarantee that the methods have a long-term impact so there is a need to use public funds prudently.

The facts – 2012: The Bath gull colony was made up of 1108 breeding pairs and had grown by 5.8% since 2011- the lowest rate of growth since 1998.

The Keynsham colony had grown from 12 breeding pairs to 46 breeding pairs (4x increase).

The MSN/Radstock colony had grown from 16 breeding pairs to 85 breeding pairs (x5 increase).

The conundrum… Rural colonies are in decline but urban colonies are thriving. They have an easy food source inland and the landscape of the city is welcoming for them to live in.

Culling? The issues to consider: Legal / Practical / Public relations

The Herring Gull is included in the UK list of priority species and habitats by DEFRA (Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs).

What benefit would actually be achieved?

Our existing intervention methods: A bird of prey has been flown for at least 5 years together with handler playing gull distress calls.  This is an attempt to deter birds from securing territories.  We have mixed evidence as to how effective this is.

Replace real eggs with dummy eggs (54 eggs were replaced last year, negligible further egg laying).

Attend regional meetings on gulls.

Waste bag trial for domestic refuse – This has been a success in New King Street and the programme is set to expand.

Trade waste – The amount of notices served on businesses for leaving their waste out for too long has doubled in the last year.

The Council has no statutory duty with respect to gulls

An uncertain future… A co-ordinated strategy? / National research? /

B&NES Council MTSRP?

The MP for Bath, Don Foster has approached the Business Improvement District to discuss how funding could be raised to carry out some dedicated research.

In the current Medium Term Service and Resource Plan (MTSRP) there is a proposal to reduce / delete part of the Pest Control Service and this would obviously have an impact on what the Council could do.

The Chairman commented that she felt that this was a serious problem for the Council and suggested working with neighbouring authorities to attempt to tackle the problem.

The Environmental Protection Manager replied that they do work with the Severn Estuary Group and are aware how much the gulls feed at the landfill sites in Emersons Green and Gloucester

The Neighbourhood Environment Manager said that a figure of £400,000 - £500,000 would be required to fund the dedicated research project and that through large companies such as supermarkets funding partners would need to be identified.

Councillor Geoff Ward commented that he felt that the gulls were a noise nuisance for visitors and residents and that their feathers and droppings were a health concern. He called for the need of a co-ordinated plan and stated that closure of any part of the Pest Control Service would be detrimental to the Council. He added that he commended the new refuse bags and bins within the City.

The Neighbourhood Environment Manager replied that the Council was doing all it practically could to make property owners aware of the situation. She added that the majority of businesses do not see it as their problem to solve.

Councillor Liz Richardson commented that food recycling appears to be very well done within B&NES and asked why so much food was available to them in Gloucester.

The Environmental Protection Manager replied that the birds are very clever and know exactly when to feed at the site. He added that Gloucester may need to change their policy on landfill in some way.

Councillor Caroline Roberts also welcomed the success of the new refuse bags and asked if they had had any effect on the time / cost of collections.

The Environmental Protection Manager replied that he had no data to hand on that matter but felt it would be fairly comparable in terms of cost and time.

Councillor Douglas Nicol asked if the bags truly were robust enough.

The Environmental Protection Manager replied that they were proving to be very scavenger resistant and that the true test would be during the gull’s breeding season.

Councillor David Martin asked who would arrange the communication to the public on the expansion of the refuse bag scheme.

The Neighbourhood Environment Manager replied that Waste Services would be handling the expansion of the scheme and advising on where to store food waste.

Councillor Gerry Curran addressed the Panel. He commented that stopping the gull’s access to food would be key and called for further controls on the disposal of commercial food waste. He also suggested that the egg replacement programme should be further resourced.

The Environmental Protection Manager thanked Councillor Curran for his comments but explained that egg replacement is a chargeable service and therefore relies on property owners or businesses requesting the service.

The Chairman thanked the officers for their presentation and suggested an update be given to either the May or July Panel meeting.