H5N1 - the virus causing Poultry Flu (or Bird Flu) - is continuing its spread around the globe, and now looks set to become entrenched in Europe. Despite what reports in the media constantly suggest, migratory birds are still not proven to be important vectors in the spread: at the root of most infections - and incontestably at the root of all infections in people - is poultry (even the Nigerian cases that caused such panic have been shown to be caused by Chinese ex-pats smuggling in chickens to celebrate Chinese New Year). The arguments for this have been set out in many places - and (belatedly) even the BBC have begun to make the connection between the virus showing up in battery farms in eastern Europe and - surprise, surprise - poultry.

As of writing there has now been a massive total of birds in Europe testing positive for H5N1. I make it about - erm - TWENTY. At the same time there are literally millions of migratory waterfowl in Europe as a whole. That’s quite a small percentage however you look at it. You can prove anything with statistics of course - but it’s mid-february, the migrants have been in Europe since September/October, and thousands upon thousands of birds have been tested for H5N1 with negative results: why the panic?

Whatever your beliefs on the origin, cause, and spread of H5N1, what should be a major cause for concern - for birders and for anyone else who is still not too frightened of birds to care about them - are the increasing calls urging the “culling” of migrant birds.

I - and many others - have been saying for months that the hysteria generated by reports in the media would lead to calls for culls, and sadly this is the case: from Europe across Asia the argument is being put forward that shooting birds - even city birds like pigeons amazingly - is necessary. It’s plain wrong on so many levels. Even if you were to ignore the fact that “culling” is just “killing” under another name - and I won’t of course - off the top of my head I can think of a number of additional reasons why:

• Aiming at the wrong target. The principal vector of H5N1 is poultry. Increased bio-security and proper animal welfare is the answer: the authorities who enforce our borders must invest more in stopping smuggling; we - as a species - must treat poultry as living creatures and treat them properly - battery farms are little more than virus factories and increasing doses of antibiotics (as has been suggested) won’t touch a viral infection.
• Scattering of wild bird flocks. Anyone with even half a brain will know that if a bunch of hunters wades into a flock of ducks or geese and start shooting, the birds will scatter. IF wild birds are in fact carrying the virus then the possibility rockets that they could then transport it to new areas. The virus is excreted in faeces - a reaction of many birds to being shot at is to excrete faeces: it’s both a stress reaction and a way of lightening themselves for rapid flight. How does this help in any way?
• Who decides which birds to kill? There is still no hard evidence that migratory birds carry the H5N1 virus. There is consequently of course no agreement whatsoever which species DO and which species DON’T carry it. In that case should everything be shot? Rare species too? Species protected under legislation, populations whose numbers are so low that “culling” might condemn them to the risk of extinction, eg Lesser White-fronted or Red-breasted Geese?
• Who will police the hunters? US and European hunters often make the claim that they are all knowledgeable and skilled marksmen. They know their birds. That’s b******ks, as any conservation organisation will attest. Rare birds are shot all the time, and that’s just in countries where there’s some notions of bird identification and record-keeping. What about in other parts of the world where there’s less education, less of a sense of (so-called) responsibility, less conservation awareness? Who is going to stand next to the hunters and make sure that they only shoot proscribed species? No-one, of course. It would take an army of observers to monitors, and that ‘army’ simply doesn’t exist…

  Incidentally, who’ll pay for this nonsense? Someone will have to pay for organising the shoots, monitoring what’s going on in the field, collecting and disposing of the bodies - many of which will be in hard-to-reach areas in the middle of wetlands. (Who’s going to volunteer to collect supposedly diseased bodies leaking fluids from bullet wounds anyway)? It won’t be the poultry industry - on whose behalf this will be going on - but us taxpayers. As I’m totally against this anyway, why the Hell should I be made to pay for it?

This isn’t “culling” - this is KILLING as a ‘panic-reaction’..

How can randomly shooting healthy wild birds - and it will be random because unless they change colour or trail a little sign there will never be a way of identifying a sick bird in flight - be called “culling”? ‘Culling’ is a livestock term that usually implies the destruction of “non-beneficial” animals. There are many definitions on the web for “culling”: eg The process of removing animals that are below average in production, unsound or undesirable; The process that determines which animals in a herd will not be bred; or The process of selecting only the best rabbits from a litter for future breeding and show stock by selling or slaughtering the least desirable specimens from a litter. If someone can explain to me how killing healthy wild birds benefits anyone I’d be glad to hear from them.

Once again we’ve reached a point where we’re preparing to slaughter healthy wildlife on the off-chance that OUR livelihoods may be affected (at least, those working in the poultry industry) or that WE may become sick from an unlikely pandemic caused by a mutated virus that doesn’t yet even exist.

Better alternatives exist - not least cracking-down on the poultry industry and the smuggling trade - but of course, it’s so much easier to load up the shotguns for a day out in the countryside.