suing councils for releasing peregrin falcons

[blittlefred]

A friend of mine called me today to say his pigeons had been attacked by a peregrine falcon killing 1 and injuring 2 and causing a few more to go missing

Ok so you say sorry but what’s new it happens all the time doesn’t it, well yes it does and that is the point.

Now what my friend is considering is to take his local council (Birmingham uk) to the small claims court. to seek compensation on the grounds that the local council by giving permission for the rspb (or whoever) to erect housing and maintain the nest sites of these birds of prey which have been introduced at sites around the city are responsible for infringing on his human rights as a pigeon fancier, his right to enjoy his hobby without his birds suffering attack.

 

Now if he was to win his case it could mean that other people could do the same and bring massive pressure to bear on the councils .who in turn would have to reconsider their policy with the rspb,(or whoever ) and the companies who give permission for the nest sites to be erected on their premises

 

Another point of interest would be the big pigeon organisations to push for whoever maintains the peregrine nest sites to be made to disclose the ring numbers of all pigeons found at nest sites , if this could be made to work then perhaps then individual owners or clubs or federations could also sue for compensation from the people responsible .

 

Not sure if this has been considered before, or tried but if they wouldn’t send an asylum seeker home because of the pet cat he had, and his human rights it may be worth a try. Perhaps theres some person out there who in light of the recent ruling may be able to make it work on behalf of the pigeon fanciers , its got to be worth a try

What do you think?

 

[oldguy]

the idea is good, but how does your friend prove its a falcon that was released, and has he got deep pockets to pay the lawers etc..... thats the hurdles that would be in his way to have a positive end to the problem when suing the local council

 

kev

[Guest lenwadebob]

It's got to be worth a try.

If cats have a licence to roam freely, then so do our pigeons, so the authorities cannot use the excuse that pigeons are not under the control of their owner when out flying. After all, in the vast majority of cases, we, as pigeon fanciers, have to seek written permission from Landlords, to erect a loft for the purposes of keeping our birds, which includes allowing them their liberty (a requirement not needed by cat owners). This is a legal document, and as pigeon fanciers, we also have human rights, which must therefore include the right to protect our property.

It would be interesting to find out who the Asylum Seekers lawyers were

[Albear]

I think the human rights act is a possible area that we as fanciers could use. It's one of the daftest bits of legislation imo. I recently read a case where a drug  dealer /gangster was not deported becaue it would infringe his human rights.

[cowman]

maybe this could be discussed with the unions rpra whu shu etc etc

[OLDYELLOW]

i think the councils help to find areas to release , the R.S.P.B release the birds so which one do you sue ? the building owner the R.S.P.B , the breeder of the bird , and how do you prove the birds actualy wild or not , most wild birds are rung on the nest , captive birds are supposed to be rung as well , so there lies the next problem proof and the only way to get that is to capture the bird thats attacking your birds and you would be prosicuted as you wouldnt have a licience to do so , so what next you ask R.S.P.B to capture the bird ? , i cant see that happening they would put it down to nature and one species is a preditor and the other ( pigeon ) nothing more than prey

[Alen Gibb]

On the face of it a great idea but I would think there is not a chance of succeeding in Court. You would have to prove 'on the balance of probabilities' that a peregrine was responsible. They wouldn't take just your word, there would have to be corroboration perhaps in the form of photographs/film of the attack. Then, because you were suing the council you would have to prove that the bird was one which the council had approved to be located on their property and not another passing through. As I said, a great idea but in practice you've got no chance. Sorry to be negative but I'm thinking of your pocket!

[chickadee]

I think if you live in the country or like us on the edge of it you have got to accept that wild life is part and parcel of your life but if you live in a city or built up area where the only way you would encounter BOP was from purpose built nests then you have a right to complain. Sadly there is more of the public that think of pigeons are just flying rats than BOP as a threat to pigeon fanciers. Loads of people think that our white pigeons and dovecotes are beautiful but as soon as any bird craps on their roof, car, washing etc our birds get the blame

[Guest youngzimmy]

FARMERS USED TO KEEP PERIGRINS AND HAWKS UNDER DONTROL AND SO IT SHOULD BE TODAY NOT ONLY ARE THEY A THREAT TO OUR RACING PIGEONS BUT THEY ARE A THREAT TO OTHER DISSAPEARING WILD BIRD LIFE WHICH IS DISSAPEARING AT A RAPID RATE TO YOU HAVE TO WONDER WHAT IS IN THE HEADS OF THESE RSPB PEOPLE THEY ARE MORE OF A THREAT TO WILD BIRD LIFE THAN ANYTHING ELSE FOR REALESING THSE MURDERING RAPTORS INTO THE WILD IN THE FIRST PLACE

[Guest JonesyBhoy]

Realistically how much would it cost for the RPRA to take the RSPB to court, to prove firstly that they are not truthful as to how many BOP's there are in these isles and secondly that its is BOP's that's massacring pigeon racing week in week out..??

[Guest bigda]

in our area the council give permission for  birds of prey to be flown at the coupe  dumps to scare seagulls,  not to say the peregrines will bother with the gulls, more like  racing pigeons in the area

[Guest IB]

I'd reason to ask  my own local council for its views on peregrines being introduced into town centres, and from their reply I'm not sure that they would think of asking local pigeon fanciers for their views on any proposal to do it here.

 

So I am not sure what consultation took place with local interested parties before the Birmingham peregrines arrived, but it is easily enough found out under request for information under the Freedom Of Information Act 2000.  Do that and they must reply within 20 days, and it may provide information on which you might be able to base a claim for damages?

[sammy]

in our area the council give permission for  birds of prey to be flown at the coupe  dumps to scare seagulls,  not to say the peregrines will bother with the gulls, more like  racing pigeons in the area

 

done you out a job of dump raking didnt it  ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

[Roland]

It's got to be worth a try.

If cats have a licence to roam freely, then so do our pigeons, so the authorities cannot use the excuse that pigeons are not under the control of their owner when out flying. After all, in the vast majority of cases, we, as pigeon fanciers, have to seek written permission from Landlords, to erect a loft for the purposes of keeping our birds, which includes allowing them their liberty (a requirement not needed by cat owners). This is a legal document, and as pigeon fanciers, we also have human rights, which must therefore include the right to protect our property.

It would be interesting to find out who the Asylum Seekers lawyers were

Firstly CATS do not have a license to roam. That is a over well used myth.

Cat owners ARE responcible for any damage, carnage, killing etc. to your property / live stock etc. etc.

Was first put wise on the BBC 'Ask the Judge'. Have since been reinforce both privately and publically. Indeed such as Alf Jones and many more warn any new house holders to keep their cats away from his gardens  / lofts etc.

Often asked how etc. And simple reply is 'Don't know, nor care, but they will lose their lives if they stray onto Mine'! Further he asks 'Just what and why do you think you can just let your cats out to foul, stick out our gardens and kill on my property'.

He has even knocked on doors and showed them dead cats and says' I'm good for my word.... Keep your cats off my property'! cat owners can and have been sued for their cats killing  rabbits, pigeons etc. That is the truth of the matter and myths don't / won't stand up in court. Others just catch and remove others cats. But that I guess is illegal  :-/ :o

 

 

[chickadee]

Firstly CATS do not have a license to roam. That is a over well used myth.

Cat owners ARE responcible for any damage, carnage, killing etc. to your property / live stock etc. etc.

Was first put wise on the BBC 'Ask the Judge'. Have since been reinforce both privately and publically. Indeed such as Alf Jones and many more warn any new house holders to keep their cats away from his gardens  / lofts etc.

Often asked how etc. And simple reply is 'Don't know, nor care, but they will lose their lives if they stray onto Mine'! Further he asks 'Just what and why do you think you can just let your cats out to foul, stick out our gardens and kill on my property'.

He has even knocked on doors and showed them dead cats and says' I'm good for my word.... Keep your cats off my property'! cat owners can and have been sued for their cats killing  rabbits, pigeons etc. That is the truth of the matter and myths don't / won't stand up in court. Others just catch and remove others cats. But that I guess is illegal  :-/ :o

 

 

From advice from other fanciers we ask our cat loving neighbours to put a bell on their collars(preferably about 10lbs ;D ) this lets the birds hear them coming. We catch them and if need be relocate them if the owners do not take care of them or care how we feel about our animals:-/

[billt]

Have they said they're releasing captive bred percy's or are they just providing nest sites, you wouldn't think they needed helping, they're pretty good at feeding themselves, perhaps they've moved to towns, I live remote and this has been my best year, no gos hen s/hawk had 2 early-on and 1 failed percy attack, not bred a youngster for 3yrs, still got 40 on open loft

[Guest lenwadebob]

Firstly CATS do not have a license to roam. That is a over well used myth.

Cat owners ARE responcible for any damage, carnage, killing etc. to your property / live stock etc. etc.

Was first put wise on the BBC 'Ask the Judge'. Have since been reinforce both privately and publically. Indeed such as Alf Jones and many more warn any new house holders to keep their cats away from his gardens  / lofts etc.

Often asked how etc. And simple reply is 'Don't know, nor care, but they will lose their lives if they stray onto Mine'! Further he asks 'Just what and why do you think you can just let your cats out to foul, stick out our gardens and kill on my property'.

He has even knocked on doors and showed them dead cats and says' I'm good for my word.... Keep your cats off my property'! cat owners can and have been sued for their cats killing  rabbits, pigeons etc. That is the truth of the matter and myths don't / won't stand up in court. Others just catch and remove others cats. But that I guess is illegal  :-/ :o

 

 

Firstly, there is no law in the UK that says domesticated cats need to be leached, which means they are FREE TO ROAM and I did NOT say cats have the freedom to cause damage or kill another persons property. Secondly, the owner of any property that has been damaged/killed by a cat does NOT have the right to take the law into their own hands and kill/dispose of another persons property (cat). FACT!!

 

[franny41]

Hi guys did anybody find an e.mail  or contact address for Ian McCall i have quite a few photos of my birds that have been damaged and killed by sparrowhawks and would love to forward them to him i think everyone should take photos and document attacks and kills on there birds and just keep nipping away with info and the powers that be have got to start listening after all that what the anti hunting league did to get there own way cheers.

 

Franny.

[Guest IB]

 

Firstly, there is no law in the UK that says domesticated cats need to be leached, which means they are FREE TO ROAM and I did NOT say cats have the freedom to cause damage or kill another persons property. Secondly, the owner of any property that has been damaged/killed by a cat does NOT have the right to take the law into their own hands and kill/dispose of another persons property (cat). FACT!!

 

You are right in what you say about not taking the law into their own hands Bob, but in Scotland at least, domestic animals are not allowed to cause nuisance to neighbours:-

 

Civic Government (Scotland) Act 1982 - section 49: this provides that any person who suffers or permits any creature in his charge to cause danger or injury to any other person who is in a public place or to give such a person reasonable cause for alarm or annoyance shall be guilty of an offence and liable, on summary conviction, to a fine not exceeding level 2 (currently £500).

 

Section 49 also provides that a district court, if satisfied that any creature kept in the vicinity of any place where a person resides is giving that person reasonable cause for annoyance, may make an order requiring the person keeping the creature to take, within such period as may be specified in the order, such steps (short of destruction of the creature) to prevent the continuance of the annoyance as may be so specified. Any person who fails to comply with the order is guilty of an offence and liable to a fine not exceeding level 3 (currently £1,000).

 

So I think you are wide of the mark if you think cats or dogs can come onto your property and you can't do anything.

[jimmy white]

A friend of mine called me today to say his pigeons had been attacked by a peregrine falcon killing 1 and injuring 2 and causing a few more to go missing

Ok so you say sorry but what’s new it happens all the time doesn’t it, well yes it does and that is the point.

Now what my friend is considering is to take his local council (Birmingham uk) to the small claims court. to seek compensation on the grounds that the local council by giving permission for the rspb (or whoever) to erect housing and maintain the nest sites of these birds of prey which have been introduced at sites around the city are responsible for infringing on his human rights as a pigeon fancier, his right to enjoy his hobby without his birds suffering attack.

 

Now if he was to win his case it could mean that other people could do the same and bring massive pressure to bear on the councils .who in turn would have to reconsider their policy with the rspb,(or whoever ) and the companies who give permission for the nest sites to be erected on their premises

 

Another point of interest would be the big pigeon organisations to push for whoever maintains the peregrine nest sites to be made to disclose the ring numbers of all pigeons found at nest sites , if this could be made to work then perhaps then individual owners or clubs or federations could also sue for compensation from the people responsible .

 

Not sure if this has been considered before, or tried but if they wouldn’t send an asylum seeker home because of the pet cat he had, and his human rights it may be worth a try. Perhaps theres some person out there who in light of the recent ruling may be able to make it work on behalf of the pigeon fanciers , its got to be worth a try

What do you think?

 

certainly worth a thought,, the paragraph about the rings i feel  makes a valid point,, these rings are purchased by the fancier therefore belong to the fancier, if the rspb regularly clear these rings from the nest sites, then  do not return or report these rings to the owners who purchased them and registered them, surely they must be recognized as stealing them,, they cannot deny they do this, as the rings have been seen on their own webcams ,, maybe a webcam should be setup by fanciers, to catch them doing this???  shoe on the other foot!!!  

[Guest Owen]

Here is where the RPRA are letting us down again. We should have the money to challenge this sort of thing. Already we have people saying things like, "Can the guy afford it". We should all make a contribution through the various Unions and not leave it to an individual.

If this chap did win, regardless of cost to him, we would all jump on the band wagon and benefit from his efforts, not to mention his pockets.

I think it is about time we all grew up and insist that the Unions took up their resposibilities. We can not leave everything to chance and the RSPB. We know for sure where that will lead us. :(

[Guest Davy Fleming]

How many fanciers in uk

[chickadee]

 

You are right in what you say about not taking the law into their own hands Bob, but in Scotland at least, domestic animals are not allowed to cause nuisance to neighbours:-

 

Civic Government (Scotland) Act 1982 - section 49: this provides that any person who suffers or permits any creature in his charge to cause danger or injury to any other person who is in a public place or to give such a person reasonable cause for alarm or annoyance shall be guilty of an offence and liable, on summary conviction, to a fine not exceeding level 2 (currently £500).

 

Section 49 also provides that a district court, if satisfied that any creature kept in the vicinity of any place where a person resides is giving that person reasonable cause for annoyance, may make an order requiring the person keeping the creature to take, within such period as may be specified in the order, such steps (short of destruction of the creature) to prevent the continuance of the annoyance as may be so specified. Any person who fails to comply with the order is guilty of an offence and liable to a fine not exceeding level 3 (currently £1,000).

 

So I think you are wide of the mark if you think cats or dogs can come onto your property and you can't do anything.

 

I hope our neighbours never read this :X

[chickadee]

 

certainly worth a thought,, the paragraph about the rings i feel  makes a valid point,, these rings are purchased by the fancier therefore belong to the fancier, if the rspb regularly clear these rings from the nest sites, then  do not return or report these rings to the owners who purchased them and registered them, surely they must be recognized as stealing them,, they cannot deny they do this, as the rings have been seen on their own webcams ,, maybe a webcam should be setup by fanciers, to catch them doing this???  shoe on the other foot!!!  

 

Don't you mean ring

[jimmy white]

 

Don't you mean ring

 

;D ;D ;D ;D