Nesting and infrastructure

Deub

Hi all,

I was on the M8 and M7 today. I noticed that there are a lot of bridges and I wondered why it is not a requirement when building them to provide nesting places in them such as boxes for small and bigger birds (for owls, swifts, blue tits, etc). Maybe adding something similar to nails under the bridge so swallows can nest.

i don't know how much it would cost to insert them in the infrastructure but it doesn't seem expensive. As an alternative, I am sure associations would be ok to provide the boxes to be fixed.

Am I missing something?

Same idea applies for insects. These infrastructures can disrupt the wild life but we could use them to change this.

Ulmus

New flood walls built along the Dodder in Ballsbridge include an artificial otter holt. No artificial nesting tunnels for kingfishers or sand martins though. We really need to support environmental organisations such as Birdwatch Ireland to lobby for wildlife.

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

Bridges on motorways would have too much disturbance from noise and light.

Deub

Porter Eager Mermaid wrote: »

Bridges on motorways would have too much disturbance from noise and light.

There are swallow and wild pigeon nests on buildings and trees in cities where there is much more light and noise.
However I agree it is something that may need to be looked at to provide nesting for birds that would not mind the light and noise.

magicbastarder

one thing about buildings and trees in cities which would differentiate them from motorways is you would not have artics driving past at 120km/h in cities - i'd say roadkill from that alone would completely preclude the idea.

there are several changes we need to make about the way we build motorways here though, one being not using solid, continuous concrete barriers in the median for tens of kilometres at a stretch.

New Home

Porter Eager Mermaid wrote: »

Bridges on motorways would have too much disturbance from noise and light.

magicbastarder wrote: »

one thing about buildings and trees in cities which would differentiate them from motorways is you would not have artics driving past at 120km/h in cities - i'd say roadkill from that alone would completely preclude the idea.

there are several changes we need to make about the way we build motorways here though, one being not using solid, continuous concrete barriers in the median for tens of kilometres at a stretch.

And let's not forget the vibrations caused by heavy traffic.

tricky D

Uric acid in droppings also damages concrete.

Deub

Ok so there are too many negatives to use bridges.
It is a pity we mainly rely on individuals to provide nesting spaces for birds and food.
I think there are so many areas of improvement such as the type of trees/bushes the city plants that could provide food and shelter. The trees currently planted are used only by wild pigeons and crows.
Boxes could be installed in parks, sunflower planted so birds can eat the seeds etc

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

The council parks around here have bird boxes, bat boxes, wild flower areas, shrubbery and general planting that suits wildlife.

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

Deub wrote: »

Ok so there are too many negatives to use bridges.
It is a pity we mainly rely on individuals to provide nesting spaces for birds and food.
I think there are so many areas of improvement such as the type of trees/bushes the city plants that could provide food and shelter. The trees currently planted are used only by wild pigeons and crows.
Boxes could be installed in parks, sunflower planted so birds can eat the seeds etc

Growing beds of sunflowers is a very ineffective means of providing nature friendly planting in a public area.

Deub

Porter Eager Mermaid wrote: »

Growing beds of sunflowers is a very ineffective means of providing nature friendly planting in a public area.

Agree but you have green areas where the public don't don't go where it could be done. You have other plants that provide food and which are nice.


Good to see that some parks have boxes.