Scottish Seagull Cull Planned

[integer]

So, do you actually have a point or is that just the old "cant be arsed" get-out with a couple of random waste facilities thrown in?

 

I know about IRIS and the Energy from Waste plant and they are both good idea's that may not have been implemented quite as well as they should, but they are a step in the right direction.

[Domino]

For the 'point' I am making, see my previous post.

You say we are still dumping waste all over the place and should leave wildlife alone.

 

So to enlarge slightly before I go for a pint:

The IRIS project treats our shit and piss which diminishes seagulls food availability.

The EfW plant minimises landfill sites which diminishes seagulls food availability further.

 

So the seagulls all move into the suburbs.

And we don't want the annoying, noisy, predatory, dirty friggin things.

 

But having them all in a few condensed areas will make it far easier to sneak up on them and decimate the population more easily - by trapping them and then beating them to death with spades. Its all part of the plan. The excecutioners will be the numpties on community service in orange day-glo jackets.

 

But I shouldn't be letting you in on these secrets really.

I bid you a pleasant evening

[spanna]

A few Eagle owls wouldnt go amiss. Taking out a few cats would go down excellent.

 

Ahh I see. So seagulls are fine and culling them would be 'murdering them', but 'taking out' cats because you fancy it is fine? Your argument therefore = FAIL.

 

You wopper!

I can see what Cret is short for now.

When exactly did cats become a part of the isle of mans natural environment...!!??

Anything that is introduced by man that is having a severe impact on the natural ecosystem needs to be addressed. Cats included.

Gulls are part of the natural ecosystem and are being very successful. They can control their own levels.. If there is not enough food they dont have as many chicks.

Do you know anything about stuff outside your 4 walls?

 

Its not very difficult to understand really is it.

[manxy]

Aren't these forums great!

Where else can you release your pent up frustration and have a good old fashioned argument?

 

It makes fantastic reading seeing one person say something that doesn't agree with another and then because the first person was bad mouthed off, they retaliate....and so on.....

 

Keep it up and I won't be watching Emmerdale

 

I wonder what would happen if the people who argued, met each other in real life? WOW!!

[CJW]

When exactly did cats become a part of the isle of mans natural environment...!!??

Anything that is introduced by man that is having a severe impact on the natural ecosystem needs to be addressed. Cats included.

Gulls are part of the natural ecosystem and are being very successful. They can control their own levels.. If there is not enough food they dont have as many chicks.

Do you know anything about stuff outside your 4 walls?

 

Its not very difficult to understand really is it.

 

But advocating the introduction of non-native species is.

Already we have had Gyr Falcons and Eagle Owls suggested as possible introductions to clear up messes of our own making.

Both species are more likely to have a detrimental impact on species other than those you are targetting.

Prevention is better than cure.

[Cret]

A few Eagle owls wouldnt go amiss. Taking out a few cats would go down excellent.

 

Ahh I see. So seagulls are fine and culling them would be 'murdering them', but 'taking out' cats because you fancy it is fine? Your argument therefore = FAIL.

 

You wopper!

I can see what Cret is short for now.

When exactly did cats become a part of the isle of mans natural environment...!!??

Anything that is introduced by man that is having a severe impact on the natural ecosystem needs to be addressed. Cats included.

Gulls are part of the natural ecosystem and are being very successful. They can control their own levels.. If there is not enough food they dont have as many chicks.

Do you know anything about stuff outside your 4 walls?

 

Its not very difficult to understand really is it.

 

Right - I've called you a wopper because the post you made utterly contradicts all your arguments which appear to be based on the idea that culling seagulls is 'murder'. This is aside from the ecological aspect. My question remains unanswered therefore - why is that bad, but it's fine to kill cats? Perhaps I should not have called you a name but I'm tiring of your answer-free replies.

 

If you answer the question instead of simply using insults to avoid doing so I'd be grateful. You didn't mention anything about cats being not native to the island when you described killing them so clearly that was not part of your argument for them being killed & is thus irrelevant.

 

And since when are cats having as you quote a 'severe impact on the natural ecosystem' & need addressing? I'm sure that's drivel. I assume you have some stats to back that up?

 

You've ignored most of the questions that have been asked and responded with beligerance pretty much all through this thread, so I don't know that I can be bothered continuing this.

 

If you reply - please try to do so without being so obnoxious like some of the other posters on the thread have quite easily managed to do.

[CJW]

And since when are cats having as you quote a 'severe impact on the natural ecosystem' & need addressing? I'm sure that's drivel. I assume you have some stats to back that up?

 

Cats do have an impact on songbird populations. Dismissing spanna's comment as drivel, when you are clearly unaware of this fact, doesn't help your argument.

[Cret]

And since when are cats having as you quote a 'severe impact on the natural ecosystem' & need addressing? I'm sure that's drivel. I assume you have some stats to back that up?

 

Cats do have an impact on songbird populations. Dismissing spanna's comment as drivel, when you are clearly unaware of this fact, doesn't help your argument.

 

I didn't say they don't. I've questioned whether or not it is a 'severe' impact or not, and asked him if he can provide some figures to help demonstrate the claim. I don't see what's wrong with that really. In hindsight it perhaps could have been worded a tiny bit more specifically but that's what I meant.

 

Again though, it's all beside the point. I was merely highlighting the point that all through this thread Spanna has been accusing people of essentially being keen to implement the senseless 'murder' of animals and has then suggested the exact same thing himself (and not even referred to it as an ecological issue) in a tone implying it's simply because he doesn't like them.

 

I've really gone past the arguments about seagulls as I've mentioned a lot of times on this thread already. I simply thought it was staggering hypocrisy from Spanna's point of view to make such a comment.

 

That is all. I don't wish to be rude, but I'm not really interested in the potential ecological damage cats may/may not cause as it wasn't being discussed when Spanna mentioned the killing of them, and as has been pointed out by Manxy the thread has already gone off the rails a bit with bickering, so it doesn't seem worth extending the 'discussion' if you see what I mean.

 

I hope that is ok.

[CJW]

I was merely highlighting the point that all through this thread Spanna has been accusing people of essentially being keen to implement the senseless 'murder' of animals and has then suggested the exact same thing himself (and not even referred to it as an ecological issue) in a tone implying it's simply because he doesn't like them.

 

 

He does have a point though, they are awful things!

[Cret]

Oddly enough - I quite like them, but I can appreciate why many people don't.

 

If they are an ecological problem I'm not sure what the answer is anyhow, but I'm not going to get into that as I'm sure it'll turn into a further scrap.

[CJW]

If they are an ecological problem I'm not sure what the answer is anyhow, but I'm not going to get into that as I'm sure it'll turn into a further scrap.

 

It would make for a very entertaining and heated thread in it's own right though...

[Cret]

I'm sure you're right. I like cats and my mrs has two but they do irritate me too. I know how rabidly defensive some cat owners cat get about their pets though and I can't be @rsed with all that.

[spanna]

cret You certainly havent been obnoxious or insulting in any of your posts..

You have been the perfect forum gentleman, I definately was obnoxious back for no reason whatsoever........

 

I dont know what question I need to answer still since I already explained it VERY SIMPLY in my last post.

Maybe you havent understood the , non native species should be controlled. Native species should be left alone to manage themselves as per NATURE.

As for stats about cats. In the uk the estimate is they kill 240 million birds a year.... if thats not severe im a dutchman.

Common sense says put a bell on the f ing things. Then they can stalk alot less.

 

cjw .. the eagle owl , gyr falcon thing was a joke.. obviously. maybe i should have put "LOLROTFLLMAO" after it to make it a bit more clear.

 

Good... end of discussion.

In conclusion Leave the Gulls alone. Let nature take its course, man should not intervene.

[Cret]

Thanks for the stats mate. But as I mentioned a couple of times already though I'm really not actually interested in that whatsoever.

 

Now, let's see:

No murdering of defenseless animals is necessary, just an application of common sense.

At the end of the day there is zero need for a modern society to murder defenseless wild animals.

then

Taking out a few cats would go down excellent.

 

So, I'll quote myself for you:

 

I was merely highlighting the point that all through this thread Spanna has been accusing people of essentially being keen to implement the senseless 'murder' of animals and has then suggested the exact same thing himself (and not even referred to it as an ecological issue) in a tone implying it's simply because he doesn't like them.

 

Also you've complained about alien species being brought here, then suggested it yourself.

Now you're using the classic "didn't think I'd have to use a smiley" chestnut, but failed to reckon with everyone's lack of mind reading abilities on here.

 

I've actually just gone briefly back over this thread and have not issued ANY insults to you until I really heinously called you a wopper for your hypocrisy (described above). Please quote me if I have.

 

On the contrary you've dished out a good few through this thread:

Absolute f ing panseys.

bunch of fannies

scottish morons

Bunch of panseys!

I can see what Cret is short for now.

 

I won't mention sarcasm since I'm guilty of using some myself.

 

You've ignored questions that have been asked.

For example:

There are simple common sense answers to any of your "issues" with gulls.

I asked you what your answers were to one or two 'issues' and you ignored them. I can't be arsed looking for other examples as I'm wasting too much time here as it is.

 

Now can you see why I might sound slightly exasperated? I'm sorry to rattle on but there you go.

 

Apologies if any of this is still unclear but it's about the best I can do I'm afraid, and I don't really care to carry on bickering with you as it's not serving any purpose.

I think I mentioned agreeing to disagree a long time back but I think that is really what's required here, if that's alright with you?

[P.K.]

So stand by your convictions and cull yourself...

Do you really not know the difference between culling and population control, or was that just a misguided attempt to be funny?

Of course I know the difference.

 

One of them is a methodology to control population growth and the other one is a methodology to control population growth.

 

A "misguided" attempt to be funny? It made me laugh, which believe it or not is fine by me. Funny that (sic).