Little Tern Project - 23 foxes shot

Working class heroes

delta_bravo wrote: »

When you mean reward do you mean protected to a level that tries to prevent their extinction? Ridiculous argument.

You are misrepresenting my point. I’m all for preventing their extinction but not at any cost i.e. the unnecessary mass killing of foxes. It smacks of hypocrisy.

Del.Monte

Anyway, it won't be a problem soon when your greenway is bulldozed through from Wicklow/Greystones - no terns and no foxes - problem solved.

2011

Working class heroes wrote: »

“Pest control” is not an answer to my question, How is this legal.

Anything that is not illegal is legal.
If foxes were a protected species then it would be a different matter. As they are considered to be pests / vermin just like rats they can legally be shot.

Here is a really good link:

https://nargc.ie/predator-control-and-the-law/

Working class heroes

2011 wrote: »

Anything that is not illegal is legal.
If foxes were a protected species then it would be a different matter. As they are considered to be pests / vermin just like rats they can legally be shot.

Here is a really good link:

https://nargc.ie/predator-control-and-the-law/

Who’d have thought an association of gun clubs consider foxes vermin eh? No. vested interest there then, is there?

Again foxes are not pests. Just because a gun club say they are does not make it so.

Working class heroes

Del.Monte wrote: »

Anyway, it won't be a problem soon when your greenway is bulldozed through from Wicklow/Greystones - no terns and no foxes - problem solved.

Not “my” greenway no more than Kilcoole beach is your beach.

Anyway you may have half a point, as foxes don’t like human interaction a greenway would assist in keeping them away from the chucks.

Happy days, everyone happy.

Bogwoppit

Working class heroes wrote: »

I don’t know, that’s why I asked.
I just can’t fathom how anyone could justify the killing of 23 foxes. The are been punished for been a successful species whilst another one is been rewarded for been far less so. It’s immoral.

Humans are far more successful than foxes, by your argument that means we can kill them all.

Bogwoppit

Currently there is a massive overpopulation of foxes in the country due to a lack of predators and an adaptation to the urban environment among other things.
Little terns are worth saving are they not?
Relocation is not a solution due to the high population levels, the relocated foxes don’t do well and all you’re doing is increasing fox numbers in a different area which is already overpopulated.
Fencing is impractical and expensive, foxes are very clever and any gamekeeper or chicken keeper will tell you that a fence will only slow down a fox, not stop it. It’s quite possible that erecting a fence may also disturb the teens and cause them to stop breeding or abandon the site. Shooting at night with a sound moderated rifle will cause little disturbance.
Shooting vixens with cubs is not ideal and best practice is to check if a vixen is nursing and if so then to try find cubs and humanely despatch them. They aren’t usually that difficult to find.
The people employed to control the foxes certainly aren’t doing it to make money, they’re probably covering their costs and not much more.
Shooting foxes is a quick and painless death for the fox when done right and is perfectly legal and quite acceptable in order to protect an endangered species.
There are plenty of instances around the world where similar practices are undertaken, should NZ cancel it’s program of trying to eradicate rats and stoats to protect their ground nesting birds because people are offended by the mass killing of rats and stoats (rats aren’t cute but stoats most certainly are)?

2011

Working class heroes wrote: »

Who’d have thought an association of gun clubs consider foxes vermin eh? No. vested interest there then, is there?

I think you will find that the authorities / government share that view.
I provided that link to show you the legal position.

RosieJoe

Here you are arguing over 23 foxes, what about the entire colony of rats removed from Dalkey Island just to allow the successful breeding of the rare Arctic Tern, see here :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

Are you all going to complain about the death of the rats too? Or are they less likely to provoke a response than the death of the foxes?

Working class heroes

Bogwoppit wrote: »

Currently there is a massive overpopulation of foxes in the country due to a lack of predators and an adaptation to the urban environment among other things.
Little terns are worth saving are they not?
Relocation is not a solution due to the high population levels, the relocated foxes don’t do well and all you’re doing is increasing fox numbers in a different area which is already overpopulated.
Fencing is impractical and expensive, foxes are very clever and any gamekeeper or chicken keeper will tell you that a fence will only slow down a fox, not stop it. It’s quite possible that erecting a fence may also disturb the teens and cause them to stop breeding or abandon the site. Shooting at night with a sound moderated rifle will cause little disturbance.
Shooting vixens with cubs is not ideal and best practice is to check if a vixen is nursing and if so then to try find cubs and humanely despatch them. They aren’t usually that difficult to find.
The people employed to control the foxes certainly aren’t doing it to make money, they’re probably covering their costs and not much more.
Shooting foxes is a quick and painless death for the fox when done right and is perfectly legal and quite acceptable in order to protect an endangered species.
There are plenty of instances around the world where similar practices are undertaken, should NZ cancel it’s program of trying to eradicate rats and stoats to protect their ground nesting birds because people are offended by the mass killing of rats and stoats (rats aren’t cute but stoats most certainly are)?

Massive over population of foxes, says who? Please don’t name various groups with an obvious vested interest.
Yes, LT’s are worth saving. I‘Ve never said otherwise. These birds are endangered because of us. I don’t think a rational solution is to start killing other animals. It’s shifting the blame, head in the sand stuff.
It may very well be legal to shoot foxes but, imo it’s certainly not acceptable, morally.

Working class heroes

RosieJoe wrote: »

Here you are arguing over 23 foxes, what about the entire colony of rats removed from Dalkey Island just to allow the successful breeding of the rare Arctic Tern, see here :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

Are you all going to complain about the death of the rats too? Or are they less likely to provoke a response than the death of the foxes?

Yes I am arguing over 23 foxes, absolutely. The rest of your post is classic whataboutery.
By all means start a thread on rats and i’ll gladly give you my view, without childish roll eyes may I add.

Bogwoppit

Working class heroes wrote: »

Massive over population of foxes, says who? Please don’t name various groups with an obvious vested interest.
Yes, LT’s are worth saving. I‘Ve never said otherwise. These birds are endangered because of us. I don’t think a rational solution is to start killing other animals. It’s shifting the blame, head in the sand stuff.
It may very well be legal to shoot foxes but, imo it’s certainly not acceptable, morally.

Have a read of Whittled Away by Padraic Fogarty, it’s an excellent book and will help explain the overpopulation of foxes far better than I could.
Controlling foxes is not shifting the blame as they are partly to blame for the fall in tern numbers and to ignore this is, to use your term, head in sand.
To allow terns to be predated upon by foxes (you will not exclude them from the site, not in any practical or affordable way) is what would be morally wrong.

Do you have any practical alternatives?

RosieJoe

Working class heroes wrote: »

Yes I am arguing over 23 foxes, absolutely. The rest of your post is classic whataboutery.
By all means start a thread on rats and i’ll gladly give you my view, without childish roll eyes may I add.

Why is there a difference between killing foxes and killing rats? The end result is culling vermin to protect an endangered species.

archer22

There is no "overpopulation" of Foxes never has been never will be..just natural population.
Foxes population is naturally regulated according to natural food supply and more importantly available territories.

Killing Foxes to control them is a fooking moron's solution!

They simply react to the pressure by having larger litters to repopulate the new vacant territories.
There is always going to be set number of Foxes EVERYWHERE but there will never be overpopulation!.

As for Foxes and Rats...Foxes are great killers of Rats.

Bogwoppit

archer22 wrote: »

There is no "overpopulation" of Foxes never has been never will be..just natural population.
Foxes population is naturally regulated according to natural food supply and more importantly available territories.

Killing Foxes to control them is a fooking moron's solution!

They simply react to the pressure by having larger litters to repopulate the new vacant territories.
There is always going to be set number of Foxes EVERYWHERE but there will never be overpopulation!.

As for Foxes and Rats...Foxes are great killers of Rats.

Unfortunately you are incorrect, human influence has led to an overpopulation.

If, as you say, the fox population was at natural levels and should be left alone then why would the same not apply to the tern population? Or any endangered population of animals for that matter, this is obviously not the case.

Human interference in the natural environment affects populations, sometimes for the better, usually for worse.

Why can’t people have some faith in the people on the ground who are making these decisions? They are there doing the job because they have the training, expertise and experience to make these decisions. They are ecologists and environmentalists and they deem the culling of the foxes to protect the terns a necessary action. Do you not think that they might have already considered alternatives?

A set number of foxes everywhere? That makes absolutely no sense at all, seriously, how did you come up with that?

Working class heroes

Bogwoppit wrote: »

Have a read of Whittled Away by Padraic Fogarty, it’s an excellent book and will help explain the overpopulation of foxes far better than I could.
Controlling foxes is not shifting the blame as they are partly to blame for the fall in tern numbers and to ignore this is, to use your term, head in sand.
To allow terns to be predated upon by foxes (you will not exclude them from the site, not in any practical or affordable way) is what would be morally wrong.

Do you have any practical alternatives?

I’ll have a look at that sometime thanks.
As an alternative to shooting foxes how about initiating a sterilization campaign.
This could be done in conjunction with all or some of the following deterrents:

The Scarecrow. Not what it sounds like. It’s very clever, look it up.
Foxwatch alarm.
Scoot Fox Deterrent.
Prickle Strip
Night Guard Solar
Get of my Garden
Ssscat
One way gate
Bricks strip
Wash off/get off
The strick back repeller
The use of radios

Have a look at Irishwildlifematters.ie for detailed descriptions.

archer22

Bogwoppit wrote: »

Unfortunately you are incorrect, human influence has led to an overpopulation.

If, as you say, the fox population was at natural levels and should be left alone then why would the same not apply to the tern population? Or any endangered population of animals for that matter, this is obviously not the case.

Human interference in the natural environment affects populations, sometimes for the better, usually for worse.

Why can’t people have some faith in the people on the ground who are making these decisions? They are there doing the job because they have the training, expertise and experience to make these decisions. They are ecologists and environmentalists and they deem the culling of the foxes to protect the terns a necessary action. Do you not think that they might have already considered alternatives?

A set number of foxes everywhere? That makes absolutely no sense at all, seriously, how did you come up with that?

Read my post...their population is SET by food supply and most importantly by available territory, Foxes with no territory DO NOT BREED...when there is available territory BREEDING INCREASES to fill the void!.

"Why can't people have some faith in the people on the ground who are making those decisions...they have the training, expertise and experience"

Yeah like people had "faith" in the Bankers and financial advisers with the training, expertise and experience on the ground before the economic disaster a few years ago

Are we still so bloody naive!

As for protecting the Terns from the Foxes...some way has to found to create a separation of the two, that is the only sustainable solution.
But that takes real effort and commitment both in brainpower and funding rather than the lazy ultimately futile bang banging and codding themselves.

RosieJoe

archer22 wrote: »

Read my post...their population is SET by food supply and most importantly by available territory, Foxes with no territory DO NOT BREED...when there is available territory BREEDING INCREASES to fill the void!.

"Why can't people have some faith in the people on the ground who are making those decisions...they have the training, expertise and experience"

Yeah like people had "faith" in the Bankers and financial advisers with the training, expertise and experience on the ground before the economic disaster a few years ago

Are we still so bloody naive!

As for protecting the Terns from the Foxes...some way has to found to create a separation of the two, that is the only sustainable solution.
But that takes real effort and commitment both in brainpower and funding rather than the lazy ultimately futile bang banging and codding themselves.

Talking about the culling of 23 foxes, absolutely. The rest of your post is classic whataboutery.

FirstIn

The fact the BWI Tern blog doesn’t detail the shooting of foxes is significant.
My opinion is they know many of us would be appalled by this.
This thread is important in highlighting this slaughter.

They need to explore better fencing , (indeed their job advert details electric fencing). trap and release and scare tactics. Just shooting the foxes is not on. It’s a dark age solution.

Working class heroes

RosieJoe wrote: »

Talking about the culling of 23 foxes, absolutely. The rest of your post is classic whataboutery.

I’m sorry, with all due respect, did you just copy and paste a response I made to you previously?

2011

FirstIn wrote: »

They need to explore better fencing , (indeed their job advert details electric fencing). trap and release and scare tactics. Just shooting the foxes is not on. It’s a dark age solution.

I disagree, all you are doing is moving the problem elsewhere at best.
Shooting works and far more cost effective.

You won’t get much of a fence for the price of a box of .243 ammo.

.243

FirstIn wrote: »

They need to explore better fencing , (indeed their job advert details electric fencing). trap and release and scare tactics. Just shooting the foxes is not on. It’s a dark age solution.

Fencing doesn’t work even electric,if there’s a food source on the other side they go over,under or even take the hit of an electric fence to get to that good source,
Trap and release is moving the problem somewhere else (the rspca in London got into trouble a few years ago trapping urban foxes and releasing them into the countryside to starve),
Scare tactics don’t work,they get used to it and the persistence of a good source brings them back,

FirstIn

2011 wrote: »

I disagree, all you are doing is moving the problem elsewhere at best.
Shooting works and far more cost effective.

You won’t get much of a fence for the price of a box of .243 ammo.

Moving the problem. What do you mean? Once the foxes are moved well away from the tern colony the terns will be fine. The terns are ok and the Fox alive. What’s the problem?

Cost effective - you are kidding me. They employ , the job advert is still there , people to shoot the foxes. That’s expensive. A lot more than the cost of a box of ammo as you ignorantly put it.

You can see from this thread people are disgusted by the shooting of the foxes. As it becomes widely known what is going on the public’s affection for the project will diminish. That’s for sure. I hope it makes BWI and the parks and wildlife service rethink their approach.

FirstIn

.243 wrote: »

Fencing doesn’t work even electric,if there’s a food source on the other side they go over,under or even take the hit of an electric fence to get to that good source,
Trap and release is moving the problem somewhere else (the rspca in London got into trouble a few years ago trapping urban foxes and releasing them into the countryside to starve),
Scare tactics don’t work,they get used to it and the persistence of a good source brings them back,

More ignorant posts by the bloodthirsty pro shoot the fox brigade. Simple question - why did they shoot 5 foxes last year and 23 this ?

I’ll tell you why as you obviously have not done your homework.

Because of an abundance of rabbits beside the terns. I don’t think the foxes will tackle an electric fence when they have an abundance of food. They don’t need to.

I’ll also ask this - why does the job advert specify
“The ability to erect and maintain electric fencing” when you say fencing doesn’t work?

Come on guys. You’re in the dark ages here. Look after the terns without shooting so many foxes. That’s what we want. And it can be achieved.

Birdnuts

archer22 wrote: »

There is no "overpopulation" of Foxes never has been never will be..just natural population.
Foxes population is naturally regulated according to natural food supply and more importantly available territories.

Killing Foxes to control them is a fooking moron's solution!

They simply react to the pressure by having larger litters to repopulate the new vacant territories.
There is always going to be set number of Foxes EVERYWHERE but there will never be overpopulation!.

As for Foxes and Rats...Foxes are great killers of Rats.

That is simply untrue as anyone who works in the area of conservation will tell you. One of the posters here referenced the excellet book "Whittled Away" and in it experts point out that the current fox population is 100k when it should be naturally around 10k. The reasons for this is that the Red Fox is not a top predator but occupies a mid level on the food chain behind top predators like large Eagles, Wolves etc. The extinction of these species allowed the likes of foxes to multiply far beyond what would occur in a pristine ecosystem. Plus foxes have invaded our towns and cities in recent years which has massively boosted their numbers too. The same thing has happened in the US when wolves,bear and cougars were wiped out by White settlers across most of the lower 48 which led to a massive increase in the Coyote population. A good example is what happened when wolves were re-introduced to ||Yellowstone NP in the mid 1990's, it led to a dramatic fall in the coyote and fox population and a big rebound in the numbers of native ground nesting birds like Sage Grouse etc.

To sum up it would be a dereliction of duty by BWI if they did not control foxes around the Kilcoole Tern colony as Little Terns are a Red-Listed species just about hanging on in this country

Maudi

Alun wrote: »

I'll ask again, point me to a piece of legislation that forbids the shooting of foxes. Hint: There isn't one.

Just because there’s no legislation there to protect foxes you deem it absolves you from torturing them? That’s just a bit sick,hint;grow some balls and stop hiding behind legislation to pursue your depravitys

Annasopra

Working class heroes wrote: »

Well yes, exactly. A bit like killing 23 foxes.

No.

Killing humans snd foxes is not the same!!!!

Birdnuts

Maudi wrote: »

Just because there’s no legislation there to protect foxes you deem it absolves you from torturing them? That’s just a bit sick,hint;grow some balls and stop hiding behind legislation to pursue your depravitys

There is no "torture" involved in shooting a fox - they die as quick as farm animals in an abbatoir.

Maudi

2011 wrote: »

“Hired gunmen” sound very dramatic
Most people call them “gamekeepers”:

https://birdwatchireland.ie/get-involved/jobs/jobs-2019-tern-project-conservation-gamekeepers-and-wardens/

Terns aren’t “game”
Foxes aren’t “game” so what “ game” are these fools actually protecting, if gun control worked the way it’s supposed to work none of these idiots would be granted a licence to keep weapons
Indeed with an over kill like what’s going on down there I’m seriously thinking of reporting to the guards, this isint why gun Licence’s are issued

Alun

Maudi wrote: »

Just because there’s no legislation there to protect foxes you deem it absolves you from torturing them? That’s just a bit sick,hint;grow some balls and stop hiding behind legislation to pursue your depravitys

My reply was to a poster who couldn't believe it was legal, and I merely pointed out that it was, or rather that it wasn't illegal. I made no comment on the moral issues.