Nesting Robin and the affects of Magpie and other predators on Song Birds

Ghandee

Is it time for a cull on these birds?
I don't know about the rest of the country, but in the Naas/Kill area were pretty much overrun with them.

They may have their place in the Eco system, but I feel their are just too many about, raiding rubbish tips, bins etc. They also have been raiding small birds (especially song birds) nests and killing young chicks in our area.
I don't know about you lot, but I'd much prefer to wake up to a blackbird or song thrush singing than a crow squawk any day!

Has the time come for a cull?

BryanL

Can you post a link Fergal, where they are asking for ruddy ducks to be killed?
Thanks, Bryan

BryanL

Leila Swift Apricot wrote: »

I really can't believe what I have been reading here for the past couple of days. Some people still believe magpies are evil birds wiping out songbirds. They do not. It has been studied over and over and stated over and over but still the falacy persists..

But the RSPB study says,"Magpie densities in urban parkland in Manchester in the
late 1980s were higher than had previously been recorded
in other urban areas, and during the same period fewer
than 5% of the blackbird nests in the parkland produced
fledged young (Groom 1993). Although the cause of most
nest failures was unknown, predation was the most
important cause where it was known, and most of this
was attributed to magpies"

Not quite what you'd have us believe?
I know that the press release they gave to the daily Mail is different from the quote above but still.
Bryan

jwshooter

Gucky wrote: »

Is it time for a cull on these birds?
I don't know about the rest of the country, but in the Naas/Kill area were pretty much overrun with them.

They may have their place in the Eco system, but I feel their are just too many about, raiding rubbish tips, bins etc. They also have been raiding small birds (especially song birds) nests and killing young chicks in our area.
I don't know about you lot, but I'd much prefer to wake up to a blackbird or song thrush singing than a crow squawk any day!

Has the time come for a cull?

i had 3 magpies in my larson trap yesterday ,all adult birds .it is so easy for any one to keep a larson trap .

like i have been saying on another thread management is the key ,no one wants to see them wiped out ,there has to be a balance .

Ghandee

jwshooter wrote: »

i had 3 magpies in my larson trap yesterday ,all adult birds .it is so easy for any one to keep a larson trap .

like i have been saying on another thread management is the key ,no one wants to see them wiped out ,there has to be a balance .

Where can I get a trap ?

Judgement Day

I find it difficult to believe that your area, or indeed any part of Ireland, is overrun by Ravens - whatever about Magpies. Rooks are in decline in many parts of the British Isles although here in the Sunny South East they seem to be doing quite well due to their adaption to street scavenging - fast food waste/bin sacks etc. I wouldn't be rushing to cull anything except perhaps those people who throw their rubbish about which helps support scavenging birds.

stevensi

I have to agree re Ravens. These are not very abundant so I think it's a little wrong to put them in this post with magpies and rooks!

Mothman

Threads merged, themes of both are quite similar

Ghandee

Judgement Day wrote: »

I find it difficult to believe that your area, or indeed any part of Ireland, is overrun by Ravens - whatever about Magpies. Rooks are in decline in many parts of the British Isles although here in the Sunny South East they seem to be doing quite well due to their adaption to street scavenging - fast food waste/bin sacks etc. I wouldn't be rushing to cull anything except perhaps those people who throw their rubbish about which helps support scavenging birds.

Apologies guys, my mistake.

Rooks and jackdaws is how th post should have read.

jwshooter

Gucky wrote: »

Where can I get a trap ?

dingle poultry supplies , you can make one for little expense .

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

There is no way any area of Ireland is over-run with Ravens. And, no offence , but it's this lack of knowledge that taints discussion on wildlife.
Now, as to the bigger issue of culling Magpies and Rooks. The only place their numbers are any higher than what the natural balance dictates is around areas where we have thrown our waste for them to feed on it.
BryanL if you quoted the entire text of the RSPB Report on The Predation of Wild Birds in the UK you would have added

"One of the most powerful, UK-wide studies involved analyses of songbird population changes recordedover 30 years on nearly 300 lowland farmland and
woodland sites (Thomson et al. 1998). From the early 1960s until 2000, the BTO organised the Common Birds Census (CBC) in which volunteer birdwatchers conducted surveys of bird populations on these sites.
Because the CBC recorded avian predators as well as songbirds, it was possible to test whether the presence or absence of sparrowhawks and magpies influenced changes in songbird numbers at those sites. If these predators were affecting songbird populations, we might expect songbird numbers to fall (or increase less) when predators were present and vice versa. The study considered 23 songbird species that fall prey to sparrowhawks, or whose eggs or chicks are taken by magpies. In only two out of the 46 comparisons made (23 songbird species, two predators) did a
songbird species decline more when a predator was present than when absent. This number is fewer than expected by chance alone (Figure 12). Thus, it is very unlikely that sparrowhawks or magpies could have caused these songbird population declines (Thomson et al. 1998)."
Study after study of the long term affects of predation has shown that Magpies do not influence the Population Trend of Song Birds.

The real confusion I find here is among those who want to control Magpies not to protect Songbirds but so they can go and hunt gamebirds. So we decide on an acceptable population density for certain birds! Based on what? How last season went? The available Pheasants? A census of songbird numbers nationally over 10 years? What? A whim?

There are 2 very clear issues here. Do Magpies affect songbird number? Yes they do but no more so than any natural predator. No more than your Blue Tits affect Butterfly numbers. No more than Squirrels take chicks. It's part of the natural cycle and birth rates reflect it. Food supplys depend on it.

Then should we cull Corvids because we don't want them around the rubbish dump or them taking young game? Only if you want to give up the pretense that you understand or respect Nature. Protect an alien species at the expense of a native one - that makes sense. Save birds so we can shoot them for sport. Fine, nothing wrong with that. Provided you cut the nonsense of claiming to be culling in the interests of the environment.
Do we cull Gulls that have landfill sites or fishing quays "over-run"? Where do we stop?

Sorry I'm ranting but these are such mis-understood issues.

Ghandee

Leila Swift Apricot wrote: »

There is no way any area of Ireland is over-run with Ravens. And, no offence , but it's this lack of knowledge that taints discussion on wildlife.
Now, as to the bigger issue of culling Magpies and Rooks. The only place their numbers are any higher than what the natural balance dictates is around areas where we have thrown our waste for them to feed on it.
BryanL if you quoted the entire text of the RSPB Report on The Predation of Wild Birds in the UK you would have added

"One of the most powerful, UK-wide studies involved analyses of songbird population changes recordedover 30 years on nearly 300 lowland farmland and
woodland sites (Thomson et al. 1998). From the early 1960s until 2000, the BTO organised the Common Birds Census (CBC) in which volunteer birdwatchers conducted surveys of bird populations on these sites.
Because the CBC recorded avian predators as well as songbirds, it was possible to test whether the presence or absence of sparrowhawks and magpies influenced changes in songbird numbers at those sites. If these predators were affecting songbird populations, we might expect songbird numbers to fall (or increase less) when predators were present and vice versa. The study considered 23 songbird species that fall prey to sparrowhawks, or whose eggs or chicks are taken by magpies. In only two out of the 46 comparisons made (23 songbird species, two predators) did a
songbird species decline more when a predator was present than when absent. This number is fewer than expected by chance alone (Figure 12). Thus, it is very unlikely that sparrowhawks or magpies could have caused these songbird population declines (Thomson et al. 1998)."
Study after study of the long term affects of predation has shown that Magpies do not influence the Population Trend of Song Birds.

The real confusion I find here is among those who want to control Magpies not to protect Songbirds but so they can go and hunt gamebirds. So we decide on an acceptable population density for certain birds! Based on what? How last season went? The available Pheasants? A census of songbird numbers nationally over 10 years? What? A whim?

There are 2 very clear issues here. Do Magpies affect songbird number? Yes they do but no more so than any natural predator. No more than your Blue Tits affect Butterfly numbers. No more than Squirrels take chicks. It's part of the natural cycle and birth rates reflect it. Food supplys depend on it.

Then should we cull Corvids because we don't want them around the rubbish dump or them taking young game? Only if you want to give up the pretense that you understand or respect Nature. Protect an alien species at the expense of a native one - that makes sense. Save birds so we can shoot them for sport. Fine, nothing wrong with that. Provided you cut the nonsense of claiming to be culling in the interests of the environment.
Do we cull Gulls that have landfill sites or fishing quays "over-run"? Where do we stop?

Sorry I'm ranting but these are such mis-understood issues.

Sorry, I corrected my mistake in an earlier post.
I meant jackdaws and rooks, not Ravens and rooks.

Still, personally I'm completely overrun with them, and I think their numbers have gotten completely out of hand!

jwshooter

Leila Swift Apricot wrote: »

There is no way any area of Ireland is over-run with Ravens. And, no offence , but it's this lack of knowledge that taints discussion on wildlife.
Now, as to the bigger issue of culling Magpies and Rooks. The only place their numbers are any higher than what the natural balance dictates is around areas where we have thrown our waste for them to feed on it.
BryanL if you quoted the entire text of the RSPB Report on The Predation of Wild Birds in the UK you would have added

"One of the most powerful, UK-wide studies involved analyses of songbird population changes recordedover 30 years on nearly 300 lowland farmland and
woodland sites (Thomson et al. 1998). From the early 1960s until 2000, the BTO organised the Common Birds Census (CBC) in which volunteer birdwatchers conducted surveys of bird populations on these sites.
Because the CBC recorded avian predators as well as songbirds, it was possible to test whether the presence or absence of sparrowhawks and magpies influenced changes in songbird numbers at those sites. If these predators were affecting songbird populations, we might expect songbird numbers to fall (or increase less) when predators were present and vice versa. The study considered 23 songbird species that fall prey to sparrowhawks, or whose eggs or chicks are taken by magpies. In only two out of the 46 comparisons made (23 songbird species, two predators) did a
songbird species decline more when a predator was present than when absent. This number is fewer than expected by chance alone (Figure 12). Thus, it is very unlikely that sparrowhawks or magpies could have caused these songbird population declines (Thomson et al. 1998)."
Study after study of the long term affects of predation has shown that Magpies do not influence the Population Trend of Song Birds.

The real confusion I find here is among those who want to control Magpies not to protect Songbirds but so they can go and hunt gamebirds. So we decide on an acceptable population density for certain birds! Based on what? How last season went? The available Pheasants? A census of songbird numbers nationally over 10 years? What? A whim?

There are 2 very clear issues here. Do Magpies affect songbird number? Yes they do but no more so than any natural predator. No more than your Blue Tits affect Butterfly numbers. No more than Squirrels take chicks. It's part of the natural cycle and birth rates reflect it. Food supplys depend on it.

Then should we cull Corvids because we don't want them around the rubbish dump or them taking young game? Only if you want to give up the pretense that you understand or respect Nature. Protect an alien species at the expense of a native one - that makes sense. Save birds so we can shoot them for sport. Fine, nothing wrong with that. Provided you cut the nonsense of claiming to be culling in the interests of the environment.
Do we cull Gulls that have landfill sites or fishing quays "over-run"? Where do we stop?

Sorry I'm ranting but these are such mis-understood issues.

the facts are we ,well some of are top of the food chain , where there is a imbalance we step in and sort it out .

grey squirrels are culled in a lot of areas again by people in the no . reds are in decline and protected there not a problem .

yes we do cull gulls ,

red grouse ,grey partridges have been one of the biggest losers as there nests are on the ground and easily found by watch full corvids .

Angus Og

But this isn't about the food chain. Weren't grey squirrels introduced by humans? In that case you could say that humans have a duty to fix the mess they made, but corvids are doing what they do in their native lands.

A human is allowed to cull corvids, but the corvid isn't allowed to cull other birds? (and by cull I mean do what's natural to it, unlike the humans). That makes no sense.

By the way, I'm genuinely interested, not looking for a fight.

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

jwshooter wrote: »

the facts are we ,well some of are top of the food chain , where there is a imbalance we step in and sort it out .

grey squirrels are culled in a lot of areas again by people in the no . reds are in decline and protected there not a problem .

yes we do cull gulls ,

red grouse ,grey partridges have been one of the biggest losers as there nests are on the ground and easily found by watch full corvids .

This, I'm afraid shows a complete lack of understanding on bio-diversity. Magpies and ourselves are not competing under any food chain. Alos, what imbalance? Who has decreeded that there is an imbalance. It's certainly not to be decided on factors such as a species population in a limited area or an impact on a particular game bird in a particular area.

The comparsion to the Grey Squirrell is misleading, as the situation involved is completely different. Greys are an alien species that have a direct detrimental affect on a Native speices in steep decline due to the alien species. Are Reds not a problem because they are in decline?

As I have maintained you are only interested in Magpie numbers for one reason and that is to ensure the maximum number of gamebirds are available to shoot. Your reference to Grouse and Partridge proves this. Shooting Game Birds is not part of the food chain. Culling Corvids to protect game birds is not conservation. And accusing Corvids of depleting our songbird numbers is not presenting the facts.

I hate threads that go on and on in circles on a subject but I feel a balance has to be given to this subject as erroneous information is being presented. Do you want just those species you feel should be available to us in numbers that you will dictate irrespective of the available food for them or their impact on other fawna and flora in the country? Our do we want a sustainable ecosystem that can manage itself?

Judgement Day

A Traditional Scottish Recipe for Rook Pie

Young rooks have a similar flavour to pigeon. Recently revived as a fashionable food in one of Sir Terence Conran's top London restaurants, rook pie has a wonderful gamey flavour. A spokesman for Sir Terence said "Rooks are not under threat as they do not have a predator apart from man and historically farmers have always had to cull particular birds, and they need a license to shoot game."

Ingredients

4 to 6 fledgling rooks*
1 pound (450 g) of beef chopped into one inch (2 cm) pieces
6 ounces (170 g) of butter
Salt
Pepper
Puff Pastry

*Fledgling rooks must be used - shot a few weeks after they have left the nest but before they fly. Older birds have a poor flavour.

Cooking Method

The rooks should be skinned and the backbones and insides removed. The rooks can then be cut into joints.

Season the joints and steak with salt and pepper and fry in hot butter until nicely browned.

Simmer the rook joints and beef in stock for two hours.

Remove the rook meat from the bones and retain the reduced stock for gravy.

Lay the steak and rook meat in a baking dish.

Cover the meat in hot melted butter and reduced stock.

Cover the baking dish with pastry.

Bake at 180 deg C (355 deg F) for 30 minutes.

http://www.scottish-recipes.com/rook-pie.html


I have to say that I do like the idea of Rook pie although not made from urban birds, and it does seem a dash unsporting to shoot the poor buggers before they have learnt to fly!

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

jwshooter wrote: »

yes we do cull gulls .

I meant to ask. Have you details of Gull culling in Ireland as a result of them feeding on landfill or taking young game?

jwshooter

what we have hear is failure to communicate and the failure by some to open there eyes and look around them .

vermin like magpies/grey crows are on the increase ,were all agreed on that .

song bird numbers are all on the decrease were all agreed on that .

vermin eat eggs/nestlings/small birds were all agreed on that .


what part of this do you not understand .

E39MSport

I've got a multitude of rooks about the place from a nearby rookerie. A very active pair of magpies and a few ravens. Indeed a few foxes and stoats. Saw a badger the other day too.

I've also got nesting wrens, blackbirds, finches, robins.. the lot. It's a bumper year for all 'garden' species and I can't see that the former have done any harm.

IMO, the sparrowhawk takes WAY more prey.

Angus Og

Well, I have my eyes open anyway. I was outside, and the family of magpies that live down the end of the garden don't seem to be affecting the song birds, or any other birds for that matter.

At this moment there is four fledged magpies and two adults living in one tree. There are also various other families around that tree. I've seen goldfinches, greenfinches, great tits, wrens, house sparrows, song thrushes, blackbirds, all within metres of the magpie family.

Every day I see them, there hasn't been a change, still lots of fledglings.

In fact, the magpies seem to be feeding on worms or something. They spend a lot of time in the grass of the field beside the garden.

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

How many Times????

Magpie numbers are showing the same trend as Songbirds. The research proves it. We are certainly not all agreed on the numbers based on your observations alone. Show the figures on a population trend basis not just that there are lots were you live.

Again, I object to references to Magpies as vermin on a Nature & Bird Watching Forum.

I never denied that Magpies eat eggs and chicks. So do Red Squirrels. Blue Tits eat the young of Butterflies. I don't deny any of this. What I do deny is that they have a detrimental affect on the population or survival rate of songbirds. Do you know why a single Blue Tit pair would fledge 7 or 9 chicks every Summer? Yes you do. And imagine if these birds all were protected from predators. Are Sparrowhawks more entitled to take birds than Magpies? Don't twist the argument. Yes, Magpies take eggs etc. No, they are not responsible for songbirds population declines.
The bit I don't understand, as you have asked, is the fiction and twisting of facts to achieve your desired results. I have no hidden motives or vested interest here, other than to ensure that those reading this thread are presented with the facts about our wildlife. I don't like seeing Magpies raid nests. I've even been known to shoo them from my bird table but I will not accept anybody demonising any species that has it's place in our eco-system in Ireland. Our diversity is limited enough without reducing it any further.

Judgement Day

Vermin is a term applied by shooters to anything that they need to justify shooting. To me a only a rat should be described as vermin - and flying rats (feral pigeons)!

Angus Og

Leila Swift Apricot wrote: »

How many Times????

Magpie numbers are showing the same trend as Songbirds. The research proves it. We are certainly not all agreed on the numbers based on your observations alone. Show the figures on a population trend basis not just that there are lots were you live.

Again, I object to references to Magpies as vermin on a Nature & Bird Watching Forum.

I never denied that Magpies eat eggs and chicks. So do Red Squirrels. Blue Tits eat the young of Butterflies. I don't deny any of this. What I do deny is that they have a detrimental affect on the population or survival rate of songbirds. Do you know why a single Blue Tit pair would fledge 7 or 9 chicks every Summer? Yes you do. And imagine if these birds all were protected from predators. Are Sparrowhawks more entitled to take birds than Magpies? Don't twist the argument. Yes, Magpies take eggs etc. No, they are not responsible for songbirds population declines.
The bit I don't understand, as you have asked, is the fiction and twisting of facts to achieve your desired results. I have no hidden motives or vested interest here, other than to ensure that those reading this thread are presented with the facts about our wildlife. I don't like seeing Magpies raid nests. I've even been known to shoo them from my bird table but I will not accept anybody demonising any species that has it's place in our eco-system in Ireland. Our diversity is limited enough without reducing it any further.

Sorry, I was just answering the 'open their eyes and look around them' thing.

I'll leave you experts to discuss.

Birdnuts

Whatever about magpies and Hoodies - I would have assumed that Rooks and Jackdaws pose little threat to other birds

Feargal as Luimneach

jwshooter wrote: »

the facts are we ,well some of are top of the food chain , where there is a imbalance we step in and sort it out .

grey squirrels are culled in a lot of areas again by people in the no . reds are in decline and protected there not a problem .

yes we do cull gulls ,

red grouse ,grey partridges have been one of the biggest losers as there nests are on the ground and easily found by watch full corvids .

http://www.birdwatchireland.ie/Default.aspx?tabid=136
A good link to reasons for decline of Irish red grouse. Yes crows are a problem but not the main problems.

BryanL

Leila Swift Apricot wrote: »

BryanL if you quoted the entire text of the RSPB Report on The Predation of Wild Birds in the UK you would have added

"One of the most powerful, UK-wide studies involved analyses of songbird population changes recordedover 30 years on nearly 300 lowland farmland and
woodland sites (Thomson et al. 1998). From the early 1960s until 2000, the BTO organised the Common Birds Census (CBC) in which volunteer birdwatchers conducted surveys of bird populations on these sites.
Because the CBC recorded avian predators as well as songbirds, it was possible to test whether the presence or absence of sparrowhawks and magpies influenced changes in songbird numbers at those sites. If these predators were affecting songbird populations, we might expect songbird numbers to fall (or increase less) when predators were present and vice versa. The study considered 23 songbird species that fall prey to sparrowhawks, or whose eggs or chicks are taken by magpies. In only two out of the 46 comparisons made (23 songbird species, two predators) did a
songbird species decline more when a predator was present than when absent. This number is fewer than expected by chance alone (Figure 12). Thus, it is very unlikely that sparrowhawks or magpies could have caused these songbird population declines (Thomson et al. 1998)."

The real confusion I find here is among those who want to control Magpies not to protect Songbirds but so they can go and hunt gamebirds.

I didn't quote the entire study as it runs to 53 pages, your only quoting one study.
But a review of All Relevant studies
The first review (Newton 1993, 1998) considered 30
studies and found that predator removal resulted in
improved nest survival of prey in 23 of 27 studies (85%),
increased post-breeding population size (‘autumn
densities’) in 12 of 17 studies (71%), and increased
subsequent breeding numbers in 10 of 17 studies (59%).
A recent update of this review (Nordström 2003)
considered eight more studies, and found, unsurprisingly,
very similar results (improvements in nest survival,
post-breeding population and subsequent breeding
population sizes of 84%, 70% and 61%, respectively).
Thus, it appears that in more than half of all studies, the
prey populations concerned had been limited by predation,
and once predators were removed, prey populations rose. "

Birdnuts

BryanL wrote: »

the
prey populations concerned had been limited by predation,
and once predators were removed, prey populations rose.[/B] "

An extremely simplistic and dangerous argument that has done untold damage to species and ecosystems around the world ever since humans decided they know better then nature, including prey species that in the absence of predators degrade their own habitats through overpopulation, depleting food supplies leading to an inevitable population crash which often takes out/negatively affects a whole host of other species that depend on the same habitat.

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

Angus Og wrote: »

Sorry, I was just answering the 'open their eyes and look around them' thing.

I'll leave you experts to discuss.

Sorry Angus, that was not addressed to you by any means. It was for JWShooter in message 49. My apologoes for any misunderstanding.

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

BryanL wrote: »

I didn't quote the entire study as it runs to 53 pages, your only quoting one study.
But a review of All Relevant studies"

Of course I only quoted one study as it was the RSPB document that was referenced. I don't deny that removing predators has been shown to increase breeding success. Predators. Not just Magpies, by the way. Also breeding success, it has been shown, does not lead to an increased long term population due to other factors such as habitat loss, ability of habitat to sustain a population etc. Let's not use survey result in isolation to deflect from the subject in hand. Sparrowhawks have been proven to have long term affects on populations but we don't hear calls to cull them, thank goodness. Perspective is important and a wider view of the natural environment.

jwshooter

Leila Swift Apricot wrote: »

Of course I only quoted one study as it was the RSPB document that was referenced. I don't deny that removing predators has been shown to increase breeding success. Predators. Not just Magpies, by the way. Also breeding success, it has been shown, does not lead to an increased long term population due to other factors such as habitat loss, ability of habitat to sustain a population etc. Let's not use survey result in isolation to deflect from the subject in hand. SParrowhawks have been priven to have long term affects on populations but we don't hear calls to cull them, thank goodness. Perspective is important and a wider view of the natural environment.

Come to think of it i have not seen a sparrow hawk for a while now ,but i did catch 5 magpies in the last two days .:D