Society
Dirty bombs: the menace persist
Published 04 October 2004
Observations on homeland security
If victory over al-Qaeda is proving elusive, a triumph is being claimed over another set of urban terrorists. Roof-nesting seagulls may sound less scary than Islamic jihadists, but their clamorous siege of ever more of our towns and cities has so far claimed more casualties.
Increasingly, the dirty bomb, the gulls' weapon of choice, is being aimed deliberately at human beings, rather than just at their clothes, cars and washing. Its toxic cocktail includes not just ammonia and four different kinds of acid, but viruses, bacteria and fungal infections. All of these are blown around as dust, once deposits have dried out. Now, though, this new enemy within is moving beyond a mere chemical and biological onslaught.
The 80,000 gulls that have settled on rooftops from Bristol to Aberdeen are wrecking homes by picking out roofing material. Their nests block chimneys and gutters and pass damp into walls. Blocked gutters can cause flooding, and a blocked gas flue can kill. However, it is direct ambush, of the kind anticipated in Alfred Hitchcock's The Birds, that has started to spread panic.
The two species involved (herring gulls and lesser black-backed gulls) have a five-foot wingspan and a huge, cruel beak. Two years ago, Wilfred Roby of Anglesey collapsed and died after gulls attacked him while he was cleaning droppings from his garage roof. Last year, a "bundle of feathered fury" dive-bombed Marie Munro's face and put the Dorset pensioner in hospital. A Sussex school has had to install netting above the playground to protect its charges from just one avian suicide bomber. In some areas, 40mph ambushes on unsuspecting pedestrians have become commonplace.
So it is little wonder that news of an apparent breakthrough in the struggle against this menace cheered beleaguered communities across the land. In Gloucester (home to 4,800 gulls), the council announced proudly "a resounding success". Its intrepid operatives had clambered across roofs to locate nests and dip the eggs in oil. This sterilises them, and leaves the gulled gulls pointlessly brooding dud progeny. Eureka?
Unfortunately, it seems doubtful. Other afflicted councils' experts are unimpressed by the Gloucester approach. "It's not the solution," says Richard Bevan, pest control manager in nearby Bristol (2,400 gulls). He points out glumly that it will never be possible to oil all eggs: Gloucester got to only 600 of them, and there are three eggs to a nest. In Aberdeen (7,000 gulls), whose roofs are apparently peculiarly oiler-unfriendly, Bevan's counterparts agree. One Yorkshire council claims to have tried oiling before Gloucester, only to abandon the method as too dangerous for its operatives.
Indeed, oiling is just the latest in a very long line of counter-terrorist offensives vainly deployed over the past half-century. Spikes, wires and nets have been liberally applied, but never liberally enough. Fireworks, streamers, sudden noises and lurid balloons have been ignored. Dummy owls and falcons have attracted only cackles from the gulls. It has been suggested that real falcons be used, but there are fears that the gulls would tear them to bits.
As with human terrorists, our civilised standards tie our hands. Shooting and poisoning would upset the public. Householders cannot simply be encouraged to dismantle nests themselves, because gulls are protected by wildlife laws. Authorised personnel can remove gulls' nests, but only if a clear threat to public health and safety, or to aircraft, can be demonstrated. Mere nuisance is not enough.
So, after oiling, what comes next? Bristol City Football Club has painted its stand roofs red, and found that gulls seem to hate the colour. Is this the answer? Probably not. The sad truth seems to be that a war against terror is a war without end.
Post this article to
We want to encourage people to comment on our content and to exchange views with other readers and hope this will be done on a courteous basis. However, if you encounter posts which are offensive please let us know by emailing comments@newstatesman.co.uk and we will take swift action where necessary.
