Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

--- the_myth_of_humane_lethal_wildlife_management [2026/02/08 20:08] – created administrator
+++ the_myth_of_humane_lethal_wildlife_management [2026/02/08 21:18] (current) – administrator
@@ Line 3: / Line 3: @@
 ===== Introduction =====
-Let me get straight to the point – wildlife management using lethal methods such as culling or killing is not just unethical and unnecessary, it is scientifically proven to be inefficient in almost all cases, in particular long-term. However, despite this common knowledge, governments, farmers, hunters, gamekeepers, pest controllers and many conservationists will almost exclusively suggest lethal methods of wildlife control as the most effective solution in wildlife conservation, wildlife management and to address any wildlife related problem. Scientific evidence suggesting the opposite will be commonly ignored, wrongly interpreted, or used out of context. There are many known factors, which influence public opinion and behaviour, but also common and widely accepted management practices. First we will highlight some of the more common problems and misperceptions, as this kind of background information may prove useful for the general understanding, before we will explore examples of lethal wildlife management and their consequences.
+{{ :roe_deer.jpeg?200|}}Let me get straight to the point – wildlife management using lethal methods such as culling or killing is not just unethical and unnecessary, it is scientifically proven to be inefficient in almost all cases, in particular long-term. However, despite this common knowledge, governments, farmers, hunters, gamekeepers, pest controllers and many conservationists will almost exclusively suggest lethal methods of wildlife control as the most effective solution in wildlife conservation, wildlife management and to address any wildlife related problem. Scientific evidence suggesting the opposite will be commonly ignored, wrongly interpreted, or used out of context. There are many known factors, which influence public opinion and behaviour, but also common and widely accepted management practices. First we will highlight some of the more common problems and misperceptions, as this kind of background information may prove useful for the general understanding, before we will explore examples of lethal wildlife management and their consequences.
 ===== The Role of Mainstream Media =====
@@ Line 26: / Line 26: @@
 The pest control industry pumps out huge volumes of misleading propaganda each year in an effort to convince the public, and those experiencing bird-related problems, that there is a need for lethal control of wild bird populations. Pest control is big business, and truly solving an animal related problem would be in fact damaging to exactly that business. Similarly, breeding game birds for the purpose of shooting them for pleasure is a fast growing industry. Anything that gets in the way of a farmer or landowner that sells these services is slaughtered out of hand. Most of the anti-magpie and anti-predator propaganda originates from game shooting interests. The organisation Song Bird Survival Trust is also known to be behind much of this propaganda.
 In order to resolve any animal-related problem, assuming that this problem exists in the first place, there has to be an understanding of the species and its environment. In most cases advocates of culling simply do not have the necessary understanding of the target species and how that species will react and respond to the lethal controls provided. At best, lethal methods used will be a quick-fix only and the situation will then be back to where it started within a matter of weeks, or the resulting situation might actually turn out to be worse than to begin with.
@@ Line 56: / Line 57: @@
 It is a well known, and a very much loved argument of culling advocates, that many species of predatory mammals and birds have increased in the UK during the last decades. Studies have shown that the density of foxes and crows, two generalist predators often highlighted as important predators of birds, are very high in the UK. In fact, our crow density was the highest and our fox density was the second highest in Europe. The density of magpies was intermediate compared to other European countries. However, studies have also clearly shown that these animals are not responsible for the decline of songbirds.
-Habitat Destruction
+===== Habitat Destruction =====
 The main causes of recent declines in the biodiversity of native birds are all entirely manmade. Human population growth, habitat destruction, forrest defragmentation, pollution, animal agriculture, global warming, hunting, fishing, herbicides and the introduction of exotic species are just a few of a large number of serious causes. The extensive and widespread use of herbicides, but also pollution and overfishing, are the main reasons, which have led to an almost compete eradication of wild animal food sources like insects and fish. Habitat destruction or wrong habitat management is another very common cause. Patches of woodlands and forestry can provide breeding areas for generalist predators, and can therefore increase the predation pressure on birds nesting in the surrounding landscape. In addition, the near absence of top predators in many parts of the UK means that the natural ‘top-down’ control of intermediate-sized predators is just not happening at the same scale as in mainland Europe.
-Shooting Industry
+===== Shooting Industry =====
 Similarly, the legal release of around 50 million so called ‘game birds’ into the UK countryside every year for shooting purposes provides an abundance of food for predators like foxes, thereby increasing the numbers of these predators that can survive and thrive in our landscape. Many of these birds are not killed by shooters, but will fall victim to road traffic accidents. This creates a steady supply of carcasses for scavengers like buzzards and crows, which easily explains the increase of their numbers. Other main causes of bird mortality, which should not be ignored, are window strikes, the already mentioned free roaming domestic and feral cats, as well as high tension wires, cars and hunting.
-The Ethics of Wildlife Management
+===== The Ethics of Wildlife Management =====
 Virtually every wild species on the planet will react and respond to lethal controls in the same way that birds do. Hunting or culling will almost always result in a short term decrease of population numbers, which is usually being followed by a marked population increase above and beyond pre-cull figures. This has been proven for many species, and not just for pigeons, foxes, deer or boar. Culling does almost always result in an increased spread of infectious diseases, as scientifically proven for foxes and badgers.
 Besides these scientific facts, culling or killing sentient beings is unethical and immoral! Culling and hunting in any form or shape, but in particular under the disguise of wildlife management or environmental protection is not needed. It does not work, and it does make things worse. Any wild animal related ‘problem’ can always be resolved by using humane and non-lethal control options.