Why is WACC against culling?

We are opposed to culling as a method of population control, firstly because it is inhumane and secondly because it doesn't work. If it did work, our conservation department and city councils all over New Zealand would not find themselves conducting these massive killing sessions so frequently. We do not oppose the reduction of animal populations perceived to be out of control. But we think that they can be reduced by non-lethal means and should be, if humane and permanent solutions are sought.

"The greatness of a nation and its moral progress, can be judged by the way its animals are treated" -Mahatma Gandhi(1)

It is demonstrably proven here in Wellington - and indeed across the world- that culling leads to a short term reduction in bird numbers which is invariably followed by a steady recovery and overall increase in the population if resources (including food and habitats) are left unaltered.

"Killing the birds is similar to bailing out a boat without fixing the hole in the bottom. Kill some birds, others take their place. That is why so many pest control companies love to poison the pigeons" -David Roth, Urban Wildlife Society (2)

View how populations increase after lethal-control events, illustrated here in this graph from the Urban Wildlife Society.

"Research has shown that simply using lethal methods of pigeon control (culling) is not effective in the long term" -West Australian government health department on pigeon control (3)

"Culling is said to be an ineffective method in the long term by government groups and animal rights groups" -Curbing the pigeon conundrum, Hon Simcha Felder, Councilor, New York (4)

"It is however generally acknowledged that culling is ineffective, as outside populations of birds soon move in to fill the vacuum left by culling" - Torbay Shire Council, UK (5)

"Culling of pigeons has been proven to be very expensive and completely ineffective, as the population is capable of rapid reproduction, year round" - Stafford Borough Council, UK (6)

Shooting pigeons, as was the suggest method for culling by the WCC in 2008, even as a last resort is unethical; it can leave young fledglings without parents to starve to death. It can result in birds becoming injured and dying a prolonged death. It leaves dead birds rotting on the tops of buildings, blocking drains and causing incredible inconvenience to city dwellers.

A Baby Pigeon

Netting and trapping methods were also been proposed as alternatives by the Wellington City Council. They too are ineffective in long term population control and are also of major ethical concern - they cause high levels of stress and suffering to the birds before they are killed. Fledgling chicks are often left behind, unable to escape or feed themselves - they slowly dehydrate and starve to death.

"The facts demonstrate quite clearly that lethal control cannot be seen as a viable method of reducing flock size under any circumstance, irrespective of the size or extent of the problem. Quite simply, it is a completely ineffective control option, whether provided as a stand-alone control or whether it is provided alongside the installation of deterrents and ant-roosting devices" - PICAS International (7)

Updates

Helping You Help Animals

SAFE NZ

PiCAS International

Save The Trafalgar Square Pigeons

PeTA International

Pigeon Control Resource Centre