magpies

jake burns

can anyone tell me the best way to get rid of magpies other than shootn them, (as i don't have a gun) they are a pest and play havoc with all the other birds who used to visit our garden, we live beside a sports ground and its over run with'em.

Run_to_da_hills

Magpies are cute and clever, if you can get them young enough you can teach them to talk.

machiavellianme

They're fiends for bread and crow poison works a charm.

Run_to_da_hills

machiavellianme wrote: »

They're fiends for bread and crow poison works a charm.

Suggestions for any sort of cruelty should not be promoted on this forum. :mad:

This forum is about nature and bird watching and not killing wildlife.

machiavellianme

Is poisoning cruel? I thought that it was designed to be humane. Didnt mean to advocate anything unreasonable. Personally, I feel magpies are a pest and require their numbers be culled. Its been so long since I've seen a robin or thrush around since the magpies eat almost everything that the smaller birds wouldve gotten. Its important that if the OP does do something drastic that he ensures none of the smaller birds inadvertently get caught up in proceedings.

boneless

machiavellianme wrote: »

Is poisoning cruel? I thought that it was designed to be humane. Didnt mean to advocate anything unreasonable. Personally, I feel magpies are a pest and require their numbers be culled. Its been so long since I've seen a robin or thrush around since the magpies eat almost everything that the smaller birds wouldve gotten. Its important that if the OP does do something drastic that he ensures none of the smaller birds inadvertently get caught up in proceedings.

Laying poison is, as far as I am aware, illegal under the Wildlife legislation enacted at present so there can be no advocacy of the practice here. By the way, you answered the question by mentioning other species in your reply.

stevoman

jake burns wrote: »

can anyone tell me the best way to get rid of magpies other than shootn them, (as i don't have a gun) they are a pest and play havoc with all the other birds who used to visit our garden, we live beside a sports ground and its over run with'em.

A humane and common method of magpie control is a larsen trap. You catch them in it and dispatch or "move" them if you wish, but i would, strictly from a conservationist point of view dispatch them humanely, as hey do a lot of damage to other species and must be contolled in a sensible manner.

They are used widely by gamekeepers and consevationists alike.

Run_to_da_hills

Another good way to get magpies out of your garden is to get a Ucaller and run the optional 10 Mtr lead and speaker across into your next doors garden, That way it wil keep the birds out of your own garden.

stevoman

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

Another good way to get magpies out of your garden is to get a Ucaller and run the optional 10 Mtr lead and speaker across into your next doors garden, That way it wil keep the birds out of your own garden.

good god you really dont have a clue! so instead of them in that lads garden raiding the songbirds nest, your solution is to sneak into next doors house and set up and speaker and try lure them in there to do damage in another man garded.

Plus that doesnt even make any sense as i think they would have the intellegence to fly back over the fence again. :rolleyes:

whitser

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

Magpies are cute and clever, if you can get them young enough you can teach them to talk.

brilliant! who writes yout stuff?

boneless

Hey folks... let's keep it civil in here, okay?

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

We're back again to the old and tired Anti-Magpie thread!

People are obsessed with aradicating Magpies. While I shoo them away from the bird table, they are not detremental to Songbird numbers in our gardens. Repeated RSPB and BTO surveys have shown that generally Songbird numbers are higher where Magpies are in abundance. It all a balance thing.
It has been discussed to death here so many times that I think some contributors are simply taking the Michael in there comments.
Magpies are an important part of the Ecology of the country, they have been here for hundreds of years and Nature will ensure that their numbers remain manageable,

It wasn't me!

boneless wrote: »

Laying poison is, as far as I am aware, illegal under the Wildlife legislation enacted at present so there can be no advocacy of the practice here. By the way, you answered the question by mentioning other species in your reply.

Just to clarify, the use of poisoned meat baits is illegal, and meat is to be emphasised.

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

It wasn't me! wrote: »

Just to clarify, the use of poisoned meat baits is illegal, and meat is to be emphasised.

Irrespective of the legalities there are the whole ethical and effectiveness factors tp consider. Poisioning any animal and not being in a position to collect the dead bodies puts other wildlife at risk. Poisioning a few Magpies around your garden will have no overall affect on numbers and more will occupy that domain if it is one suited to Magpies.

stevoman

i agree, no creature should be poisened. not even rats. if an animal must be controlled i beleive t should be in a humane and in the most natural manner.

Galvasean

machiavellianme wrote: »

They're fiends for bread and crow poison works a charm.

Main problem being what's to stop other birds from eating the poison?

whitser wrote: »

brilliant! who writes yout stuff?

Actually magpies are extremely intelligent. Under the right circumstances they can learn to 'talk' similar to parrots:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t6hJkdMpO-0

stevoman wrote: »

i agree, no creature should be poisened. not even rats. if an animal must be controlled i beleive t should be in a humane and in the most natural manner.

That rat poison is far from humane. Read on if you want to know:

basically upon eating the poison the rat becomes incredibly thirsty so seeks out water. However once the poison comes into contact with water it reacts causing massive internal inflation, killing the rat in a gruesome and very painful way. This form is popular because it means you don't have to pick up dead rats from your lawn as the generally die at a river.

edit: woops, sorry about that, messed up my spoiler tags

boneless

Any more talk of poison and the thread gets locked.

brianthebard

Donovan Gorgeous Lubrication wrote: »

We're back again to the old and tired Anti-Magpie thread!

People are obsessed with aradicating Magpies. While I shoo them away from the bird table, they are not detremental to Songbird numbers in our gardens. Repeated RSPB and BTO surveys have shown that generally Songbird numbers are higher where Magpies are in abundance. It all a balance thing.
It has been discussed to death here so many times that I think some contributors are simply taking the Michael in there comments.
Magpies are an important part of the Ecology of the country, they have been here for hundreds of years and Nature will ensure that their numbers remain manageable,

Eh magpies are song birds???

boneless

brianthebard wrote: »

Eh magpies are song birds???

I don't think you read his post right. He just said the songbird population is constant to the magpie one... or sumpin' like that .

brianthebard

I read his post fine thanks, I was just pointing out that magpies are songbirds, something that seems to pass a lot of people by in these threads.

boneless

brianthebard wrote: »

I read his post fine thanks, I was just pointing out that magpies are songbirds, something that seems to pass a lot of people by in these threads.

Ah, the use of the "?" marks led me to think you were asking a question rather than making a statement.

lightening

brianthebard wrote: »

I read his post fine thanks, I was just pointing out that magpies are songbirds

Who told you this?

brianthebard

A bird book. Wikipedia. science. Why?

lightening

I think you may have read wrong to be honest. I thought songbirds were small birds like the warblers, finches, and sparrows the largest being a thrush. Notably they all have a melodious call.

Is the magpie not part of the crow family with a harsh cackle call?

brianthebard

lightening wrote: »

I think you may have read wrong to be honest. I thought songbirds were small birds like the warblers, finches, and sparrows the largest being a thrush. Notably they all have a melodious call.

Is the magpie not part of the crow family with a harsh cackle call?

My reading skills are fine thanks (but questioned twice in the last hour, wtf?)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Songbird

Crows and thrushs are also songbirds. But sure why not look at superfical things like names and guess that a magpie can't be a songbird?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corvidae

Current systematics places corvids, based on physical characteristics other than their brains (the most developed of birds), in the lower middle of the passerines, contrary to earlier teleological classifications as "highest" songbirds due to their intelligence.[7] As per one observer,

There are nearly 4000 different songbirds, do you really think they all sound like thrushes?

lightening

brianthebard wrote: »

questioned twice in the last hour, wtf?

I know... mad isn't it? How could that be?

brianthebard

I see you edited your post, realise you were wrong and that magpies are songbirds?

lightening

brianthebard wrote: »

I see you edited your post, realise you were wrong and that magpies are songbirds?

No, I just didn't want to insult you. What I posted up originally was a bit rude.

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

brianthebard wrote: »

I read his post fine thanks, I was just pointing out that magpies are songbirds, something that seems to pass a lot of people by in these threads.

Sorry but Magpies are not classed as "Songbirds". I know it's hardly a scientific classification but it is in popular use in Birding circles and it certainly does not include any of the family Corvidae .

Wikipedia is hardly the greatest source to quote on any topic!

brianthebard

Well I got it from a birdbook first and then used wiki. If you feel its untrue please provide a counter source.

stevoman

I wouldnt consider a magpie a songbird either.

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

Birdweb.net wrote:

To find out why songbirds are in trouble, the RSPB is undertaking intensive research on species such as the Skylark and Song Thrush. To discover whether Magpies (or Sparrowhawks) could be to blame for the decline, the RSPB commissioned the British Trust for Ornithology (BTO) to analyse its 35 years of bird monitoring records.

BTO.org wrote:

For many people the Magpie is a villain, responsible for the widespread decline of songbirds. Research examining the question of whether Magpies have been responsible for songbird decline has failed to find any evidence to support the notion that they are to blame.

RSPB.org wrote:

The study found that songbird numbers were no different in places where there were many magpies or sparrowhawks from where there are few.

Plenty more from The Songbird Trust, Bexley et al.

As you can see the terms Songbird and Magpie are used in a mutually exclusive manner. Hence why the birding fraternity usually refers to small passerines as Songbirds and those big black & white Crows as Magpies.

gerky

I generally agree with Srameen on most things nature related, but in a lot of encyclopaedia, scientific journals and research relating to them Corvidae are classed as Oscine Passerine birds.

http://www.nationmaster.com/encyclopedia/Corvidae
http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/139000/Corvidae
http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=2481519

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

Apologies for straying off topic.

I agree fully that Corvidae are classed as Oscine Passerines. As Passerine refers to perching birds they can be nothing else; but the point is that they are not usually taken to be included in the, admittedly unscientific, term "Songbirds".

:)BK