Stop developers netting hedges to prevent birds nesting Petition

Geoff Moore said:
How is even a thing? - Somebody actually thought to prevent Birds from nesting! What happened in that persons childhood! .. I'm actually taken aback.
Click to expand...
The reason this tends to be done is to stop birds nesting in a section of hedgerow that is destined for removal (perhaps due to road-widening schemes, cross-country pipeline routes, housing or retail developments, etc.).

All nesting birds are protected by law, which means that if a bird nests in a hedgerow, tree, building, etc. then the nest has to remain there until the bird is no longer using it. The birds' nesting season is usually taken to be from March to August inclusive, although some species (such as pigeons) can nest outside this period. https://www.gov.uk/guidance/wild-birds-protection-surveys-and-licences

Sometimes, the required permits or planning permissions are not in place in time to remove a section of hedge in winter when most birds are not nesting, so long delays to projects can occur if nesting birds are encountered before the section of hedge can be removed. Netting a section of hedgerow is one way of potentially avoiding such delays, but needs to be carried out carefully to avoid the unintentional trapping of birds and animals, and I believe the netting should be checked on a regular basis to ensure it remains in a safe and serviceable condition. Maintenance issues can sometimes occur if a project is delayed and the netting is in place for a relatively long period of time.

Whether netting is a good idea or not seems to be a current topic of debate, however, if netting is outlawed then I wouldn't be at all surprised if the construction industry started to lobby for a change in the law to licence the destruction of active nests of 'common' bird species on overriding social and economic grounds.
 
Last edited:
The last paragraph of Mr B's is my concern .

I'm no fan of these nettings,they should be checked twice daily at the very least,I doubt they are. The trouble is I work in this industry and see what goes on know how it works,sadly, this solution UGG as if it's a solution.......... might just be the lesser evil.

The sheer power/might of the construction industry will inevitably prevail over a few birds,it is appalling but I worry on what the alternatives might be ,desperate isn't it !!

stu
 
As Mr Badger said, there's a very good reason for doing this. While it's not 'ideal' it is far preferable to removing hedges when birds are nesting in them, which will certainly be the result if it's prevented (big builders often seem quite happy to remove stuff that's not meant to be removed & just pay the fine afterwards).
 
Instead of moaning about it can you suggest a viable alternative to prevent birds nesting in hedgerows that are due to be grubbed out. The following season they would need to find an alternative so what's the difference this year. I can understand and agree if there is a way of not removing the hedge at all then it should be saved. But just signing these petitions doesn't solve the problem it will just cause long delays (possibly expensive) and the end result will be the same.
Not signed.
 
Have to say I agree with Mr Badger, if it's done correctly and legally then all should be kosha.
However, I expect there are contractors who may turn a blind eye.
 
The two stories I recall hearing about, both mentioned the same damning "problem".

The hedge and the trees in question were netted at the appropriate time I.e. before nesting time but it seems that at the time of the netting the builders already knew they could not start the projects until late in that year or even early next year ~ respectively stopping nesting when not required and/or could have simply delayed it until after the current years nesting.

In other words as I perceive it they needlessly netted and willfully decided not to remove the netting until it was actually required!!!
 
Big Andy said:
I agree that's bad but the idea is good just not the implementation.
Click to expand...

Quite, so the problem was not the netting but the timeliness (it also seems dumb to use nets like that because it takes time=money to place them and then it's lost income while they are in place because they can't be used elsewhere and are deteriorating).
 
I agree with the netting. With this netting comes issues in that the birds find there way in to your home and cause damage instead!!

I've got a permit to terminate eggs, destroy nests and repair the damage but I can't bring myself to do it. Once they move on I'll get the repairs done but this just goes to show what an adverse affect these stupid nets and other deterents can have for nesting birds.

To add .

I believe ground work should be done with an eye for preventive measure reduction. I've, if a project is scheduled, do the work on the hedges etc outside of nesting periods in preparation for the incoming project. We all have a calendar to hand and the ability to forecast. Fines should be out in place to businesses that fail to do this causing the requirement for netting in the first place.
 
Last edited:
Done - Its around the 204,000 area now :)

Les
 
It's funny how this has just been *discovered* by the activists.
They started doing it at least ten years ago where development was scheduled, and the purpose is to protect birds by ensuring they don't nest in trees and bushes that will need to be removed.
They will therefore nest elsewhere until the site is developed and new landscaping completed.

Is the alternative supposed to be shut down any building and site clearing for at least six months.
Don't tell me, they don't have an alternative except a nebulous desire to somehow make things tough for building work.
 
I saw this on the telly at the weekend and was disgusted so i'm in.
 
Looks like we wone , Just had this email from the government , see the section I highlighted , Thanks if you are one of the 100.000

The Government has responded to the petition you signed – “Make 'netting' hedgerows to prevent birds from nesting a criminal offence.”.

Government responded:

Causing suffering to birds is already criminal. Planning authorities have enforceable powers to protect bird habitats and will soon be able to mandate that developers provide biodiversity net gain.​
Wild birds and their nests are already protected under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 and the Animal Welfare Act 2006. It is an offence to cause unnecessary suffering to a bird by an act, or a failure to act, where the person concerned knew, or ought reasonably to have known, that the act, or failure to act, would or be likely to cause unnecessary suffering. Anti-bird netting can, however, be appropriate in a few exceptional circumstances, to protect birds during construction work, or where birds have been identified as a health hazard.
Every local authority also has power to impose conditions when it grants planning permission, and these conditions can specify what information it needs to understand and protect any wildlife on the application site, and at what time of year development may take place. The authority can also use planning conditions to prevent disturbance on parts of a site, and stipulate how the phases of construction should be managed to avoid harm to biodiversity.
On 8 April 2019, in response to public concern about anti-bird netting around permissioned or potential development sites, a letter from the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government was forwarded to major house-builders. It reminded them of their legal obligation to consider the impact of any project on local wildlife and take precautionary action to protect habitat. The Secretary of State was clear that if developers do not follow their obligations, he has not ruled out further action to protect our country’s valuable ecological system. Following this, major house-builders announced an end to the practice on their sites.
Our National Planning Policy Framework expects planning policies and decisions to enhance the natural environment by minimising the impacts of development on, and providing net gains for, biodiversity. We plan to require developers to deliver biodiversity net gain, under the forthcoming Environment Bill. Local authorities will be able to make certain that avian habitat is left in a measurably better state than it was before development.
Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government
This is a revised response. The Petitions Committee requested a response which more directly addressed the request of the petition. You can find the original response towards the bottom of the petition page (https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/244233)​
Click this link to view the response online:

https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/244233?reveal_response=yes

This petition has over 100,000 signatures. The Petitions Committee will consider it for a debate. They can also gather further evidence and press the government for action.

The Committee is made up of 11 MPs, from political parties in government and in opposition. It is entirely independent of the Government. Find out more about the Committee: https://petition.parliament.uk/help#petitions-committee

Thanks,
The Petitions team
UK Government and Parliament
 
Yes, I had the email and hope that a positive change for good in favour of wildlife does indeed take place!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top