Jays

[mark williams 7,549]

Well I went out, no gun, as I often do, planning the next ambush, ( sub 12 static hunting ) on the pests and vermin.

                Watched a couple of Jays eat a poor fledgling alive and then the nearly born from this egg.

                Such cruel but beautiful of birds the Jays.

                So the song birds will be on their menu now for sure in my woodland permission.

 

                Keep your eye on them lads.

[sam r 354]

Shoot the damn things 

[jeemes 3,491]

They seem to be one of the species that suddenly boost in number recently, certainly in the Midlands anyway. You seem to see them in so many more places now instead of just in the woods. Ive shot more in the last 12 months than the previous 40 years I should think. Never an easy bird to get a shot at, I remember once ignoring a lovely driven Pheasant to shoot a fleeting Jay and feeling very happy to get him, but it didnt impress anyone else. Anyway they seem to come readily to the Squirrel feeders and are fair game when they do.

[Dervburner 2,548]

They seem as common as magpies here. I shoot them (to protect endangered woodland birds) when the opportunity arises, they’re serious nest raiders.

[Bosun11 537]

Jays can be ruthless hunters. Thing is, if you have nothing to protect then maybe leave em be. Jays are also excellent for re-wilding areas for trees, especially oak.

We have a number of Jays here and they are rapidly improving the local woodland. The amount of oak saplings popping up is staggering. I'm all for them...

[sam r 354]

10 hours ago, jeemes said:

They seem to be one of the species that suddenly boost in number recently, certainly in the Midlands anyway. You seem to see them in so many more places now instead of just in the woods. Ive shot more in the last 12 months than the previous 40 years I should think. Never an easy bird to get a shot at, I remember once ignoring a lovely driven Pheasant to shoot a fleeting Jay and feeling very happy to get him, but it didnt impress anyone else. Anyway they seem to come readily to the Squirrel feeders and are fair game when they do.

I had 6 this year off squirrel feeders still loads more to have 

[Dervburner 2,548]

39 minutes ago, Bosun11 said:

Jays can be ruthless hunters. Thing is, if you have nothing to protect then maybe leave em be. Jays are also excellent for re-wilding areas for trees, especially oak.

We have a number of Jays here and they are rapidly improving the local woodland. The amount of oak saplings popping up is staggering. I'm all for them...

yerr, if there’s not many of them about I’d leave them alone.

[j j m 6,479]

i had young black birds leave the nest this morning within minutes a magpie appeared to take a young black bird i was already waiting with gun cocked and window open head shot the magpie was to busy watching the young black birds on the lawn to se me take it out

[Timmy H 192]

On 10/06/2022 at 17:43, j j m said:

i had young black birds leave the nest this morning within minutes a magpie appeared to take a young black bird i was already waiting with gun cocked and window open head shot the magpie was to busy watching the young black birds on the lawn to se me take it out

Unfortunately blackbirds aren't on the red or amber list so technically you should have left the magpie alone. Or said nothing.

[Timmy H 192]

On 10/06/2022 at 16:13, Bosun11 said:

Jays can be ruthless hunters. Thing is, if you have nothing to protect then maybe leave em be. Jays are also excellent for re-wilding areas for trees, especially oak.

We have a number of Jays here and they are rapidly improving the local woodland. The amount of oak saplings popping up is staggering. I'm all for them...

90% of oak trees are planted by jays. I leave them alone for that reason.

[Dervburner 2,548]

2 hours ago, Timmy H said:

Unfortunately blackbirds aren't on the red or amber list so technically you should have left the magpie alone. Or said nothing.

But ‘technically’ shooting a magpie will be protecting the thrushes and sparrows, and any other birds on the red or amber list that likely frequent and/or nest in the garden.

[Timmy H 192]

2 hours ago, Dervburner said:

But ‘technically’ shooting a magpie will be protecting the thrushes and sparrows, and any other birds on the red or amber list that likely frequent and/or nest in the garden.

I agree, it would be better to say protecting sparrows or thrushes which is a valid reason. Where do you think Packham and Wild Justice got all their information about illegal shooting from? Forums and shooting mags I bet. Just in the last few weeks I've seen a post elsewhere about someone needing to shoot 300+ pigeons to fill an order, supplying the food trade. Better to just do it and say crop protection.

[Timmy H 192]

This is a favourite topic of mine. As a 64 year old countryman I appreciate ALL wildlife, it's all there for a reason and needs to survive, that's what gives us diversity.  We might not like a magpie or a jay raiding a nest but that is nature and all those species have survived for 1000s of years before human beings started interfering. Predators have never wiped out a species, humans do it regularly. How do we pick what we should control? Robins eat anything and will fight to the death over territory, the tits and swallows, martins etc eat insects that are vastly reduced in numbers, blackbirds eat worms, thrushes eat snails including the rare mendip snail, should we shoot the thrushes to protect the snails?  It seems to me that too many shooters just target crows, magpies, jays, rooks and jackdaws because they think they can just shoot them as a pest. That's totally wrong, the real pest is the person who sets up artificial feeders and nest boxes to encourage the already successful species like blue tits that have exploded in numbers in the last 10 years to the detriment of rarer birds that need the same nesting sites in the wild. Shooting corvids to protect rare birds is daft, if they're rare the corvids aren't likely to find them anyway, they'll nearly always find nests of the common birds like pigeons and blackbirds which are a natural food source and as common as hell. Nature will find a balance, always has and will continue to do so, when the food supply runs short then the corvids will take a big hit on numbers. Over 30 years of the GLs, a legal challenge that proved shooters were ignoring the rules and still we have posts that are technically "illegal" shooting. Who will we blame when all bird shooting except pheasants and partridges is banned? Obvious isn't it? Blame the shooters who break the existing GLs, post it up and boast about it to get a few others saying "well done". Shooting corvids just because they are doing what they have always done isn't sensible, take out a few and the next year they will breed even more to make up the numbers, only food supply and conditions will really regulate the numbers. Just as an added point, in woodland, 2 of the biggest nest raiders are green and spotted woodpeckers who will raid nestholes in trees, so why aren't we shooting them? I'm not saying we shouldn't control corvids but we should be thinking about all our bird species, not just the pretty ones that we want in our gardens, they've all been here a lot longer than us humans.

[Bosun11 537]

20 hours ago, Timmy H said:

This is a favourite topic of mine. As a 64 year old countryman I appreciate ALL wildlife, it's all there for a reason and needs to survive, that's what gives us diversity.  We might not like a magpie or a jay raiding a nest but that is nature and all those species have survived for 1000s of years before human beings started interfering. Predators have never wiped out a species, humans do it regularly. How do we pick what we should control? Robins eat anything and will fight to the death over territory, the tits and swallows, martins etc eat insects that are vastly reduced in numbers, blackbirds eat worms, thrushes eat snails including the rare mendip snail, should we shoot the thrushes to protect the snails?  It seems to me that too many shooters just target crows, magpies, jays, rooks and jackdaws because they think they can just shoot them as a pest. That's totally wrong, the real pest is the person who sets up artificial feeders and nest boxes to encourage the already successful species like blue tits that have exploded in numbers in the last 10 years to the detriment of rarer birds that need the same nesting sites in the wild. Shooting corvids to protect rare birds is daft, if they're rare the corvids aren't likely to find them anyway, they'll nearly always find nests of the common birds like pigeons and blackbirds which are a natural food source and as common as hell. Nature will find a balance, always has and will continue to do so, when the food supply runs short then the corvids will take a big hit on numbers. Over 30 years of the GLs, a legal challenge that proved shooters were ignoring the rules and still we have posts that are technically "illegal" shooting. Who will we blame when all bird shooting except pheasants and partridges is banned? Obvious isn't it? Blame the shooters who break the existing GLs, post it up and boast about it to get a few others saying "well done". Shooting corvids just because they are doing what they have always done isn't sensible, take out a few and the next year they will breed even more to make up the numbers, only food supply and conditions will really regulate the numbers. Just as an added point, in woodland, 2 of the biggest nest raiders are green and spotted woodpeckers who will raid nestholes in trees, so why aren't we shooting them? I'm not saying we shouldn't control corvids but we should be thinking about all our bird species, not just the pretty ones that we want in our gardens, they've all been here a lot longer than us humans.

Great post...  

[Timmy H 192]

4 hours ago, Bosun11 said:

Great post...  

Thanks, it's meant sincerely. We are at a point where we may lose any pest control shooting in a few years due to the lead ban and possibly a renewed challenge on the GLs. I think we'll follow other European countries with a ban on live shooting with air rifles. When the first challenge to the GLs by Wild Justice happened I signed up for their newsletter to see what we were up against. Well I can tell you that they are far more up to date with the laws than most shooters, they made us look like uneducated idiots and actually they weren't far wrong, most shooters really don't have a clue about the rules or don't care, we still have posts that blatantly break the law and that gives ammo to Packham and his friends for the next legal challenge, sooner or later they will get all live shooting banned. When that happens, don't blame Packham and his cronies, blame the idiots that shoot illegally, boast about it and give WJ all they need to hound us. The ones that ignore the GLs or simply don't bother to follow the rules. When you can no longer take a few woodies off standing crop or take a magpie out for threatening a thrushes nest or to protect a sparrows nest, blame those who screwed it for everyone else. Personally I'd like to see some prosecutions with maximum penalties, currently unlimited fines and/or 6 months inside for those that break the rules. If we keep to the rules we may keep live shooting but I'm afraid too many don't care, don't understand or are too stupid to realise they are killing our sport.