Parakeets added to 'general' list

[RobinP]

I read today that the colourful (and noisy) ring-necked parakeet has been granted the same status as most corvids, i.e they can be shot without licence. Their crime? Being a bit noisy and eating fruit, how dare they? And of course the good old RSPB has come out and supported this, glad I'm not giving them any money anymore.

[Stinky Bob]

I heard its more than being a bit noisy and stealing some fruit, if (if) there's any truth with them competing against the woodpecker then I would prefer control of the parakeets.

What I do find disturbing is that they made it general knowledge rather that just quietly add it to the list, the way they have done it may mean that parakeets are actively targetted regardless of any nuisance they may cause.

[Stinky Bob]

I take it you have not read the document:
General Licences under wildlife legislation in England
Summary of Consultation Responses & Decisions
Consultation Period
December 2008 – March 2009
Published
September 2009

because if you had you may not of made the comments that you did about the RSPB
PS This is an extract (and not taken out of context)
The RSPCA, RSPB & WWT see general licensing as disproportionate for Monk Parakeet, and they question the evidence of damage by Ring-necked Parakeet in context of General Licences permitting what they believe amounts to an unmonitored „free-for-all‟ to kill them. The RSPB further suggested that the addition of the latter species is contrary to Natural England‟s five stated principles of licensing2; stating that they do not believe there is a genuine problem to resolve nor that the licensed action will contribute to resolving the problem. These organisations all suggest that there‟s no evidence to support the recommendation. West Sussex Wildlife Protection goes further still, suggesting that any action is just an excuse for sport and that these species are a welcome addition to our fauna.

And from the Independant:
The Royal Society for the Protection of Birds today displayed what might be described as an uncomfortable acceptance of the move. “We can see why Natural England have put these species on the general licence, for good conservation reasons,” said Dr Mark Avery, the RSPB’s conservation director. “Non-native species cause problems for native wildlife across the globe, sometimes leading to species extinctions. At the moment these species aren’t causing conservation problems in the UK, but they might in future. However, you still need a legitimate reason under the general licence to kill them."

[ron1863]

People cannot just turn up and shoot them:

BBC NEWS | UK | England | London | 'Problem' parakeets can be shot

[aeshna5]

Originally Posted by Stinky Bob

I heard its more than being a bit noisy and stealing some fruit, if (if) there's any truth with them competing against the woodpecker then I would prefer control of the parakeets.

What I do find disturbing is that they made it general knowledge rather that just quietly add it to the list, the way they have done it may mean that parakeets are actively targetted regardless of any nuisance they may cause.

There is no evidence that woodpeckers are losing out to RNP. If you go to Richmond Park in London there are several hundred RNP, but there are also plenty of Green + Great-spotted Woodpeckers as well as a small number of elusive Lesser-spotted Woodpeckers.

Plenty of other hole nesters- couple hundred or so Jackdaws, Stock Doves, several pairs of Kestrel, Tawny + Little Owls, Starlings, Nuthatches + tits.

[Stinky Bob]

Originally Posted by aeshna5

There is no evidence that woodpeckers are losing out to RNP. If you go to Richmond Park in London there are several hundred RNP, but there are also plenty of Green + Great-spotted Woodpeckers as well as a small number of elusive Lesser-spotted Woodpeckers.

Plenty of other hole nesters- couple hundred or so Jackdaws, Stock Doves, several pairs of Kestrel, Tawny + Little Owls, Starlings, Nuthatches + tits.

Thats why I put a double "if" , I read the summary report from Natural England and quite a few news articles and still cannot understand why they have been put on the list,
Here is the link to the summary report in PDF format:
http://www.naturalengland.org.uk/Ima...tcm6-13924.pdf

[aeshna5]

Originally Posted by Stinky Bob

Thats why I put a double "if" , I read the summary report from Natural England and quite a few news articles and still cannot understand why they have been put on the list,
Here is the link to the summary report in PDF format:
http://www.naturalengland.org.uk/Ima...tcm6-13924.pdf

Oops so you did!