Meeting of the Parliament 26 June 2025
Christine Grahame is perfectly able to do that, but I strongly disagree. They are a menace. My constituent in Hopeman who was on the radio today used the phrase “dive-bombing” because they are being dive-bombed by these birds.
I want to highlight the work that is being done by business improvement districts. The work that Fergus Ewing and I have done together has been ably aided by the BIDs in Nairn and Inverness. They are going above and beyond for their members to get schemes in place, but it is costing a fortune. The motion also mentions just how much money is being spent on trying to get licences and control the birds. Tens of thousands of pounds are being spent by business improvement districts, common good funds and community councils. That huge amount of money could be better spent on other local projects or on improving the environment for local businesses, but it has to be spent on tackling this issue.
I encourage people in the strongest possible terms, as I am sure the minister will, to stop feeding these birds and to stop leaving rubbish out, because that causes part of the problem. I am not ignoring that; I am reinforcing it.
There is also an issue with the licensing scheme, as it is proving far too complex, difficult and expensive to get licences.
I come to the debate not just with complaints but with solutions. We need to keep a record of the number of attacks on people by gulls. I put that to the minister last week at portfolio question time on rural affairs, land reform and islands, and I was encouraged by his response. However, I wonder how on earth NatureScot can refuse applications by saying that the gulls in a particular area are not a health and safety risk when it is not even recording how many people are being injured in attacks by gulls.
Conversely, NatureScot does record injuries and deaths—not of people but of birds. If birds go into wind turbines, NatureScot keeps a record of that, but it does not keep any record of people being injured. I think that it has to look at that.
I want NatureScot’s role to be very much separate. It is currently clearly conflicted between conserving and preserving bird numbers and being the agency that deliberates on, and rejects or approves, applications to control birds. It is no longer possible for NatureScot to do that dual role, so I hope that the minister will consider separating those roles. We need action from the Government, because, 23 years on from the previous members’ business debate on the subject, gulls are still an increasing problem in our communities. They are causing a nuisance, and people want action.