Douglas Ross hits out at NatureScot in debate on 'dominating' seagulls
The debate was led by Mr Ross after he submitted a motion stating that the parliament should note concern around the reported changes to the approach taken for granting licences to control gulls in recent years by NatureScot.
He argued that this has led to fewer licences being approved.
A total of 2,041 licences were granted in 2023, however this figure fell to 505 in 2024.
He told the chamber there is a 'clear conflict' in the Scottish Government body Nature Scot between conserving and preserving bird numbers and controlling the applications to regulate bird numbers.
READ MORE:
Can you be fined for feeding seagulls? Rules to follow
Boffin denies being corrupt, but admits being incompetent
Dundee University principal: 'I'm not corrupt, I'm incompetent'
The Former Scottish Conservative leader said: 'Currently they are clearly conflicted between conserving and preserving bird numbers and also being the agency that looks at and deliberates on applications to control birds.
'It is not possible any more for Nature Scot to do those dual roles."
Mr Ross pointed that Nature Scot keep a record of bird deaths or injury but not take any record of people injured.
'I think they have to look at that," he told MSPs today, "We do need to see a record of the number of attacks on people by gulls.
'They are causing a nuisance and people want action.'
Mr Ross said communities and businesses in his own constituency of Moray, Nairn and Inverness have had significant problems with gulls in recent years, but that many communities across Scotland also experience similar problems.
He also said the gulls are causing 'mental health issues' as their constant screeching torments the general public.
'They are a menace,' he emphasised to parliament.
Mr Ross said he is not ignoring that people are encouraging gulls by feeding them and he accepted that was 'part of the problem'.
Gulls 'dominating areas' are also seeing a reduction of other smaller birds, he argued.
Mr Ross called on more "robust action" from the Scottish Government and NatureScot to protect humans and businesses from "the menace of dangerous gulls".
He said this could include Scottish Ministers taking action through a section 11 order under the Natural Heritage (Scotland) Act 199.
As a rebuttal, SNP MSP Christine Graham made her 'cautious defence of the common gull'.
She named them 'clever and adaptable', saying she has seen the birds 'case out' shop fronts to find food.
The MSP, sympathetic to the plight of the gull, said this is not 'mugging' and it would be wrong to anthropomorphise the gulls, adding that humans are 'mucky creatures' and, unlike gulls, know better.
'What we mustn't have is people versus gulls or gulls versus people', she stressed.
SNP MSP Emma Roddick said there is potentially a need to reconsider what actions local councils can take to prevent damage and injury caused by gulls.
Scottish Conservative MSP Findlay Carson said the 'wild flappers' appear to 'rule the roost' in his constituency of Dumfries and Galloway and 'appear to revel in the misery that they cause'.
'It's a growing public safety risk…These birds are no longer confined to our beaches,' he said.
Labour MSP Rhoda Grant said it was important to note that the birds are not 'acting maliciously' but are protecting their young.
However, she said the birds were causing considerable injury and it is a 'public health issue'.
Green MSP Mark Ruskell raised in the chamber that the gull population numbers have halved since the 1980s.
However, in a heated interaction, veteran SNP MSP Fergus Ewing intervened to say 'there was no such evidence for that' based on an FOI responses he had received disputing their decrease.
The Agriculture Minister said he did not accept this comment from Mr Ewing and said he needs 'definitive proof' that is the case.
Mr Ruskell continued to argue that the species numbers are declining and that the parliament should focus on 'finding a better way to co-exist' with an 'under-attack" species.
Agriculture Minister Jim Fairlie said he accepts this is a 'deadly serious' matter in Scotland.
He said licenses are dealt out for dealing with gulls is based on Nature Scot guidance which has changed.
'The use of language such as menace or nuisance is not a licensable purpose and that's a really critical part.
"They can only be issued on the basis of health and safety which is why there has been this differentiation since previous applications.
'We have delegated [license] power to Nature Scot and that is where it should stay for this moment in time.'
The minister said if the government went against their licensable purpose it could 'open' them up to judicial review.
'Therefore it would not be appropriate for ministers', he said.
Mr Fairlie said society must limit food waste and public littering to 'take away feeding opportunities'.
The Minister has said he will convene a summit on the issue in Inverness where the 'entire issue' of seagulls in Scotland will be raised.
'I'll make sure that we try to progress this so that we are not standing here in ten years time with another member's debate about gull species,' he concluded.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The National
26 minutes ago
- The National
Keir Starmer is in an historic mess. There's only one person to blame
KEIR Starmer's difficulties with his Orwellian 'welfare reforms' continue to mount. Those "reforms" of course consist of cruel cuts to the benefits received by some of the most vulnerable people in society – benefits which as a disabled person myself I know from personal experience are already exceptionally difficult to prove entitlement to. What's more, despite the impression to the contrary which Starmer's ghouls like to present, they are not out of work benefits. Even if they were, Starmer, Chancellor Rachel Reeves and Work and Pensions Secretary Liz Kendall have never coherently explained how cutting the meagre support for disabled people will assist them into work, nor where exactly all the employers queueing up to offer work to disabled people are. Now a large number of Labour MPs, backed by the SNP, the LibDems and the Greens, have signed a wrecking amendment to the Universal Credit and Personal Independence Payment Bill which would kill it off even more effectively than the bill would kill off disabled people. The bill is due to be debated and voted on in the Commons on Tuesday of next week. As things currently stand, the government does not have the numbers to force the bill through. The Tories, whose main objection is that it's not cruel and nasty enough, smell blood in the water, and have signalled that they will not vote with the UK Government. Starmer has handled the prospect of a backbench rebellion in the same high-handed, arrogant and patrician manner in which he dealt with those Labour MPs who retained a sense of why they been elected and voted with the SNP in the early weeks of Starmer's government to axe the heinous two-child cap on benefits. Those MPs were suspended from the Parliamentary Labour party. Starmer's first instinct when faced with this brewing rebellion was to threaten his allies, telling the potential rebels that they'd be excluded from government positions unless they got back into line. That backfired, and the number of Labour MPs who had signed the rebels' wrecking amendment continued to grow. Reportedly, cabinet ministers including Reeves and Health Secretary Wes Streeting – presumably on a break from courting private healthcare companies for donations – phoned rebel MPs and told them that the vote would be one of confidence in Starmer's leadership. UK Health Secretary Wes Streeting reportedly rang around trying to get MPs to support the cutsThis had the effect of increasing the number of Labour MPs who signed the amendment from 108 to 123. Starmer patronisingly dismissed the growing anger in his party as "noises off" and in consequence, by Thursday the number of Labour MPs who had signed the amendment had increased to 126. It cannot be stressed enough just how remarkable this development is. Starmer was elected with a landslide majority in the Commons less than a year ago, his government should still be in its political honeymoon period, impervious to challenge and able to govern supreme. That the Prime Minister is currently staring at the prospect of defeat at the hands of its own MPs is unprecedented at this stage of the term in office of a British Government with a solid Commons majority. That this has come to pass is entirely due to Starmer, his lies and duplicity about change, and his staggering lack of political ability. Labour's newly elected MPs are facing the realisation that they may be political one-hit wonders and as such they have nothing to lose by rebelling against the government. Even twelve Labour MPs representing Scottish seats, normally the Labour party's most reliable lobby fodder, have signed the rebel amendment. That is one-third of Labour's Scottish contingent in the Commons. This is a direct challenge to Anas Sarwar, who has given his backing to the benefits cuts. READ MORE: Can Keir Starmer find any policy that Anas Sarwar won't support? At First Minister's Questions in Holyrood today, First Minister John Swinney attacked Sarwar for his supine obedience to Starmer, even though these cuts will, by the Labour government's own figures, throw 250,000 disabled people, including 50,000 children, into poverty. Anti-poverty and disabled rights organisations calculate that the true number could be even higher, with in excess of 400,000 disabled people being driven into poverty as a direct consequence of Labour's cuts. Swinney remarked that Sarwar's willingness to blindly follow Starmer's line on cuts to benefits for disabled people is a sign that he "will not be standing up for Scotland any time soon". That about sums it up. This piece is an extract from today's REAL Scottish Politics newsletter, which is emailed out at 7pm every weekday with a round-up of the day's top stories and exclusive analysis from the Wee Ginger Dug. To receive our full newsletter including this analysis straight to your email inbox, click HERE and click the "+" sign-up symbol for the REAL Scottish Politics
Leader Live
29 minutes ago
- Leader Live
Calls for Scotland-wide seagull summit amid warnings someone could be killed
Former Scottish Tory leader Douglas Ross, who called a debate on the issue at Holyrood, warned that Scots risk losing their lives over the 'growing problem' of 'nuisance' gulls. Fellow Tory Rachael Hamilton said a nationwide summit must be held to tackle the issue as she warned that Scots are being left 'scared, attacked and traumatised'. Agriculture minister Jim Fairlie had already promised to hold a seagull summit in the north of Scotland but Ms Hamilton, who represents the south of Scotland, said a summit for the whole country is needed. The Ettrick, Roxburgh and Berwickshire MSP said 'aggressive' seagulls had attacked seven children in one month last year in Eyemouth, with one girl 'left with gashes to her scalp and blood running down her face'. She called for action on the 'growing nuisance', which she said posed a health and safety risk to residents. Despite rising complaints from locals, though, she said NatureScot's licensing system to control the birds was bureaucratic and failing to solve the issue. 'I think we need a summit,' she said. 'I don't think we just need a summit in Moray, we need a summit across Scotland.' Ms Hamilton said the debate was 'important' as she criticised what she said was a lack of action from the Scottish Government. She told MSPs: 'Absolutely nothing is getting done. I don't believe the Government are listening to us because the issue continues in my constituency in Eyemouth. 'Aggressive seagull behaviour continues to cause a real concern amongst businesses, amongst tourists, amongst everybody that has anything to do along the harbour. 'And it is not just a seasonal nuisance. It is a serious, growing health risk. It's a safety risk, particularly for children and elderly residents.' She said one business owner had described the situation as 'people being scared, attacked and traumatised'. NatureScot and the SNP have ignored this problem for far too long. I'm bringing forward a debate in Parliament today to demand action to control the menace of gulls in our communities. — Douglas Ross MSP (@Douglas4Moray) June 26, 2025 MSPs debated the issue on Thursday, the last day of Parliament before the summer recess. Opening the debate, Mr Ross said people often 'smirk' when hearing that the Scottish Parliament is debating the problems around gulls – but he said it was an 'extremely serious issue'. The Highlands and Islands MSP said constituents have told him they are worried about leaving their homes for fear of being 'divebombed', while others have suffered mental health issues thanks to a lack of sleep caused by noisy gulls. One resident, he said, is spending £2,000 a year to remove nests from her home. 'People should not have to keep living in fear of being divebombed by these menaces on a daily basis, and are crying out for action,' he said. He accused NatureScot of having a conflict of interest as the body responsible for both the licensing to control birds and to conserve them. He went on: 'The behaviour of the SNP's quango NatureScot confirms they have lost the plot. They have told people to protect themselves with umbrellas and even suggested dogs as a deterrent. 'The time has come to break up NatureScot. There is a clear conflict of interest in the fact they are responsible for considering licences to control gulls but are also responsible for protecting bird numbers. 'If the minister cannot see that is a problem, then he is divorced from reality. 'The strength of the cross-party support in my debate today should be all the SNP Government need to finally act before we see someone killed due to being attacked by a gull.' Jim Fairlie, the minister for agriculture, said while people often 'chuckle and laugh' about the issue of gulls, he warned it was 'deadly serious'. But he told MSPs that he could not intervene on NatureScot to change the licensing system because it would leave the Government open to judicial review. He urged people to stop feeding the birds, which he said was the primary reason for the issue. The birds have been an increasingly common site in urban areas as they leave their natural habitat in search of food. He said: 'We have to work out what it is that is causing the issue in the first place. 'We are feeding them – it is quite simple. We are creating habitat, and we are creating feeding stations which are allowing gulls to inhabit our space, and that is now quite clearly coming into conflict.' He added: 'We have got to try and limit food waste and public littering. We have got to take away these feeding opportunities.' SNP MSP Christine Grahame warned against 'demonising' gulls, which she described as 'clever, adaptable' animals. 'Language such as 'mugging', 'menace' can be applied to us, our fellow counterparts,' she said, 'but it is not appropriate to demonise an animal simply looking for food. 'Anthropomorphising is tempting but not helpful.' A NatureScot spokesperson said: 'We understand gulls can sometimes cause problems in our towns and cities. 'At the same time, gull populations are facing serious declines. NatureScot has a duty to balance health and safety concerns with gull conservation. 'Over the last five years we have supported many individuals, businesses and communities to better manage gulls without the need to kill the birds or destroy their nests. 'As a result, the number of licence applications to destroy nests and eggs and kill chicks has reduced, from 2,633 in 2023 to 1,601 in 2024.' The spokesperson said in the longer term, Scots will 'need to find ways to live with gulls and other wildlife'. They added: 'We will continue to work with local authorities to ensure that collaborative gull management plans are put in place for future years, with a focus on effective preventative measures, deterrents, changes to behaviour and guidance.'
The Herald Scotland
30 minutes ago
- The Herald Scotland
Polite but persistent: Brian Taylor on the art of political interviews
'Think of the people watching, the people voting,' Mr Taylor tells me as I chat to him ahead of The Herald heading to The Fringe this year. With a career in the media spanning over 40 years - much of that time spent as political editor for the BBC - it's more than fair to say that The Herald columnist knows a thing or two about conducting a good interview. And he will be doing just that when The Herald's Unspun Live at the Fringe heads to Summerhall's Dissection Room in over a month's time. First Minister John Swinney will be in the hot seat as Brian Taylor interviews him on August 5. This is certainly not Mr Taylor's first rodeo when it comes to interviewing Mr Swinney. Brian Taylor on the art of a good political interview (Image: Colin Mearns) He has followed the First Minister's career in the SNP from the get-go. From when he was national secretary of the party to his first spell as SNP leader, then to backbench MSP to taking on ministerial roles, and being once again thrusted into the top job of the party and becoming the 'unexpected First Minister', as Mr Taylor puts it. READ MORE: Mr Swinney has often been branded as the 'safe pair of hands' politician. The man who has steadied the ship as the party faced choppy waters under his predecessors. 'Has that always been the case?', I ask the seasoned broadcaster. 'He is a remarkable figure within the SNP because he brings stability, he certainly has endeavoured to do so in the past year, but he is a passionate, fervent nationalist as well. 'He is a passionate, fervent advocate for independence which some perhaps miss when they see that he pursues a tactical and strategic role.' 'He is the unexpected First Minister. If anything we thought his ministerial career was over. 'And then a crisis within the SNP and therefore within the Scottish Government arose and the cry was, 'Send for John'. 'He thought about it and, boy, did he have to think about it.' Mr Swinney has opened up about the personal conflict he felt when considering taking the country's top job. Being there for his wife who has multiple sclerosis and his teenage son, weighing at the forefront of his mind. Brian Taylor and Hannah Brown (Image: Colin Mearns) During his interview with the First Minister in August, Mr Taylor wants to get past 'the sound and fury' in Scottish politics. He wants to find out their 'real' offering to voters ahead of the Scottish Parliament elections in May 2026. Mr Taylor said: 'I've never experienced in more than forty years as a journalist a period of tension and disquiet in the body politic and in people as there is now. "I called it repeatedly in my Herald column the age of anxiety, and I'm quite certain that is the case." Some questions Mr Taylor is keen to pose to Mr Swinney include: What does he think about challenges confronting him ahead of the Holyrood elections, what does he think about his rivals for the post of First Minister and what does he think about his predecessors? With so much to cover and only 45 minutes of the First Minister's time, how does Mr Taylor get the best out of a prominent political figure like Mr Swinney? 'What I'm trying to do with any political interview,' Mr Taylor said, 'It is to think not of my objectives, think not of what the First Minister brings to the table, think of the people watching, the people voting. What would they want to ask if they were in my position? 'You ask the questions on behalf of the public that they want answers to, legitimately want answers to. Not the froth, not the frippery, not the nonsense but the genuine answers that the folk on the doorsteps want answers to but you ask them from a position of analytical knowledge." The broadcasting and political expert said 'analytical knowledge' could cover a range of things such as comparing previous statements made by ministers to current ones as well as insight into issues such as the independence strategy or health statistics. But how you frame questions to interviewees is key. 'You say it persistently but you say it politely," he tells me, 'The people should be watching the interview and saying, 'That's it. That's the question I want answers to.' Unspun Live at the Fringe will also include Scottish Labour leader Anas Sarwar who will face questions from The Herald's editor Catherine Salmond on August 6. We will also hear from deputy first minister Kate Forbes on August 7 and polling expert Sir John Curtice alongside "special guests" on August 4. At every event, there will also be ample time for Q & A with the audience. 'It's quite an exceptional line-up for what promises to be an exceptional series of events,' Mr Taylor said, 'The Edinburgh festivals generally are a core part of Scotland's existence and The Herald is also a core institution in Scotland so it's a natural match between the two.' For those on the fence about buying tickets, Mr Taylor has a message: "Rush, rush, the tickets! "It's going to be a great series of events." 🎟️ Book now for The Herald's Unspun Live at the Edinburgh Fringe – featuring John Swinney, Anas Sarwar, Kate Forbes and more
