people for the ethical treatment of animals · 2013-01-23 · and people for the ethical treatment...

Managing Pigeon NumbersFeral pigeon populations in urban areas around theworld become a concern for residents and propertyowners when the birds, seeking shelter and a place tonest, take up residence in city buildings and are seen asan inconvenience by the community. As “pest” controlcompanies play to this intolerance as a sure-fire way torustle up business, the public is often told that pigeonsare a pest and a health hazard and that they spreaddiseases and parasites to humans and domestic animals.In reality, the Centers for Disease Control and Preventionand departments of health around the country agreethat pigeons do not pose a threat to public health.

Cities and companies that perceive a “pigeon problem”traditionally resort to methods such as trapping,shooting, and poisoning as a way to reduce thepopulation. These methods are ineffective and haveeven contributed to an overall increase in the number ofpigeons in a given area.

The U.K.-based Pigeon Control Advisory Service (PiCAS)and People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA)present a holistic, integrated plan below that hasconsistently proved to reduce pigeon populations by anaverage of 50 percent and keep them at that reducedlevel.

But first, here is a brief look at the conventionallyemployed methods of reducing pigeon populations andan explanation as to why they don’t work.

Traditional Control Methods Don’t WorkConventional methods of pigeon population controlinvariably involve killing adult pigeons and have provedunsatisfactory and ineffective. It has been found that thepopulation in fact increases as a result of killing off part

of the population because once the adult pigeons areremoved, younger birds no longer experience such fiercecompetition for food and are thus left to breed out ofcontrol. The reduced population also results in a greateramount of food for the remainder of the flock, andbecause pigeons breed in relation to the extent ofavailable food, this also contributes to a buildup in flocksize. In fact, population numbers have been shown notonly to quickly rise to the original figure but in manycases to exceed it.

Lethal bird control is a multibillion-dollar businessworldwide. Despite research establishing theineffectiveness of lethal control and the continuedsuccess of humane control methods described later inthis report, it is no surprise that many “pest” controloperators (PCOs) still recommend lethal control as aviable option. Because these lethal methods ensure thatpigeon populations not only return to original levels butalso exceed them, this means return business for PCOsindefinitely. Operators thus have a vested commercialinterest in marketing lethal control, such as the methodsdescribed below:

1. Trapping Is Cruel and IneffectiveMany cities address their pigeon problems by seeking totrap resident pigeons through a lure of a live bird orgrain and relocating them to another region or killingthem once trapped. Such a method ultimately provesineffective because of the following:

• Relocation either transfers pigeons to othercommunities or results in pigeons’ returning to theoriginal location (pigeons will almost always returndirectly to their roost because of their extraordinaryhoming instincts). If relocated far enough away, it

PIGEON-CONTROLSOLUTIONS

PERMANENT AND HUMANE

PEOPLE FOR THE ETHICAL TREATMENT OF ANIMALS

is, of course, possible that some pigeons may not returnto their home, but to survive, they must be released neara source of food. If they are not released in closeproximity to humans, they may starve. Transferring theoverpopulation concern to another city is not thesolution.

• Trapping primarily captures adult birds, which leavesflightless and orphaned infant pigeons (squabs) to die ofstarvation, and because pigeons breed throughout theyear, trapping can lead to public relations problems. Italso leaves the squab carcasses to rot and becomemaggot-infested, presenting a health risk.

• Cities employing programs that trap and kill not onlyexacerbate the overpopulation problem as outlinedabove but also are open to a public relations nightmare.

2. Poisoning Is Dangerous and IneffectiveIn the U.K., poisoning pigeons has been outlawed as anindiscriminate cause of massive suffering and painful, oftenlingering deaths, not only to the pigeons but also to otherbird species, including migratory songbirds who consumethe laced feed and any birds of prey or mammals whoconsume contaminated bodies. Poisoning has also provedboth in Europe and the U.S. to be ultimately ineffective inreducing pigeon numbers. Yet, despite their inability toprovide long-term solutions, poisons are still usedextensively in the U.S. on our pigeon populations and as aresult have managed to increase pigeon numbers for thereasons outlined above.

3. Narcotic Baits and Hallucinogens Cause SufferingProducts such as Avitrol are often misrepresented to citiesby PCOs as a way of moving birds away from problem areaswithout killing them. Treated grain is left for the pigeons inthe same way that poison would be administered. The drugis intended to work as a “chemical scarecrow” to deterother birds who have not eaten the treated bait. Thecompany claims that the drug causes affected birds to issuewarning cries and show signs of distress that warn theothers that the target area is not a safe place to be, and thebirds move off.There are several key problems with employing this method ofcontrol:

• The product was developed for birds who have aphysiological ability to make distress calls, but according tothe Urban Wildlife Society and the Animal ProtectionInstitute of America, pigeons do not make a sound when inpain and cannot issue the loud alarm notes required for theproduct to be effective.

• Avitrol Corp.’s own president has explained that the product“causes the bird’s brain wave to go flat” and that thepigeon’s “distress cry” is, in fact, impulsive muscle twitches“that make the bird appear as though it is trying tocommunicate.”

• Pigeons who ingest Avitrol experience not only these muscletwitches, but also seizures, regurgitation, disorientation,rigidity, loss of muscle coordination, and cardiac arrest.

• Songbirds and birds of prey can also consume the Avitrol-laced feed. It is a violation of the Migratory Bird Treaty Act(with an attached $15,000 fine per violation) to directly orindirectly harm any bird, with the exception of pigeons,starlings, grackles, and English house sparrows. Ward Stone,wildlife pathologist for the New York Department ofEnvironmental Conservation, has proved that protected andendangered birds, including red-tailed hawks and peregrinefalcons, die as a result of preying upon pigeons who haveconsumed Avitrol. Consequently, Avitrol was banned in NewYork in 2000 and in San Francisco. It has even led to the filingof a lawsuit by a family who was exposed to Avitrol aroundits Las Vegas apartment building and became ill as a result.

Narcotics are also administered to pigeons in an effort to inducestupor so that the birds can more easily be caught and killed.However, the vast majority of birds who consume the bait flyaway to die of starvation, dehydration, or hypothermia, ormembers of the public find them flopping around on roads andpavements in a distressed state and complain to the mayor’soffice and public works departments. Nontargeted predatorswho consume the drugged birds can die from the narcotic.

4. Shooting Is Cruel and UnreliableShooting fails to address overpopulation concerns. PCOs thatemploy shooting as a method of pigeon control rarely requiretheir employees to undergo any formal training before takingan air gun or pellet rifle to typical roosting places. Because it isvirtually impossible to kill a bird as large as a pigeon this way,

2 PEOPLE FOR THE ETHICAL TREATMENT OF ANIMALS

PIGEON CONTROL: PERMANENT AND HUMANE SOLUTIONS

the majority of the targeted birds aremerely wounded or maimed by thepellet rifles and left to die. PiCAS reportsvarious cases in which wildlife rescueorganizations have been called in toclean up the mass of dead and dyingbirds after a shooting, justifiably causinga public relations nightmare. In addition,discharging firearms is not legal in mosturban areas. Although shooting requiresminimal effort on the part of the controlcompany, ensures return business, and istherefore frequently recommended as aviable method of control, it is inhumaneand it does not address overpopulationconcerns in the long term.

Why Lethal Controls AreIneffectiveLethal controls are ineffective because they do not address thecause of overpopulation. As noted above, killing adult pigeonsin a feeding flock will favor younger birds who, without theemployment of lethal control methods, would otherwise have apoorer chance of survival. Many older, nonbreeding birds arekilled in lethal control operations, leaving the younger, healthystock to breed.

Lethal controls therefore fail to deal with the source of theproblem, which is the overabundance of food sources availableto the pigeon population. As Guy Merchant, the director ofPiCAS, explains:

Pigeons control their own numbers very effectivelyaccording to the volume of food available to them. An adultpair of pigeons will usually breed up to 4-6 times a year butcan breed more frequently in optimum conditions,producing 2 young each time. If, however, the food supplyis dramatically reduced and there is only enough food tosupport the existing flock, adult birds may only breed onceor twice or possibly not at all. Pigeons will not produceyoung if there is insufficient food to support them. If,however, the food supply increases for any reason(following a cull, for example), pigeons will breed[continually] until the flock reaches the point where it is fullyexploiting the food available to it.

Thus, “culling” pigeon populations has the same effect on flocksize as does an increase in available food.

PiCAS Integrated Management: The Humane andPermanent SolutionThe solution to pigeon population control lies in controllingfood sources and the places in which food is available to thepigeons. PiCAS can guide you through the best way to reducepigeon numbers using such a method.

What Is PiCAS, and What Can It Do for You?PiCAS is the leading international authority on humane pigeoncontrol programs. Merchant is recognized as the premier expertin reducing pigeon numbers and introducing permanentsolutions to pigeon roosting and nesting problems and has 30years’ experience in successfully doing so. The method createdby PiCAS is widely used in Europe and is endorsed by the BritishRoyal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals and theRoyal Society for the Protection of Birds.

PiCAS provides total backup to cities and companies choosing toemploy a humane method of control, offering a comprehensive,free, and knowledgeable service.

3PEOPLE FOR THE ETHICAL TREATMENT OF ANIMALS


The PiCAS Method:Consistent Success inReducing Pigeon Numbers

PiCAS has had steady, proven results with integrated andhumane management programs throughout Europe. This hasgarnered widespread recognition that this is the only effectivemethod of controlling pigeon populations as well as praise andrecognition from the community, commercial interests, andanimal welfare organizations alike. Clients ranging from citiesand counties to large hospitals, railways, corporateheadquarters, heritage sites, and others look to PiCAS to put inplace a solution to their pigeon problem.

On average, the PiCAS method reduces pigeon populations byabout 50 percent, indefinitely. Some case studies of cities andsites where this has been achieved are outlined below, but first,the essential features of a PiCAS plan are outlined.

The Secrets of SuccessThe key reasoning behind the PiCAS method acknowledges thatthere are two entirely separate problems associated withpigeons in urban areas: There is the overnight roosting for thepurposes of sleeping and breeding, and then there is the

perching during the day to exploit food sources.Feeding and roosting areas will generally beseparate, and the pigeons will migrate between thetwo at dawn and dusk. PiCAS favors an integratedapproach focusing on the following complementarypractices:

• Identifying areas to be used as designatedfeeding areas and on which artificial roostingand nesting houses (dovecotes) can beconstructed. In many cities where notablemonuments or buildings reside and there is a

substantial tourist industry, thesedovecotes can be fashioned in theimage of a well-loved citylandmark. Pigeon populations arethen diverted to these chosenareas, and the amount of feedthat is distributed to thepopulation is controlled. PiCAS

recommends selecting an area that is relativelyclose to established roosting sites and in whichpigeons are already present to some extent.

• Removing eggs from the dovecotes and replacing them withdummy eggs to reduce pigeon numbers. Egg removal couldbe done by city staff or volunteers from local wildlife groups,and PETA is ready and willing to assist with such programs.

• Obtaining widespread media coverage to accomplish thefollowing:- Make the public aware of the program and the existence

of the new designated feeding sites- Discourage feeding other than within these areas- Explain why this control is desirable for the city and the

pigeons by outlining how feeding is contrary to pigeonwelfare in the long run and that the new designatedfeeding sites are part of a plan to reduce pigeon numbers

- Emphasize to the city’s property owners the importance ofa citywide pigeon-proofing effort

• Encouraging property owners in areas of concern to pigeon-proof their buildings to discourage roosting and nesting byinstalling humane exclusion and deterrent measures andexplaining why this is essential to addressing the pigeonproblem. PiCAS is willing and able to become thoroughly



Kortrijk, Belgium

involved in helping businesses to find the most cost-effectiveand proven methods to ensure that property owners canaddress their concerns, and PiCAS can also help the cityproduce a leaflet to be distributed to property ownersoffering advice on how best to pigeon-proof. It recommendsthat local authorities be the first to pigeon-proof in an effortto lead by example.

The key benefit of this scheme is twofold: Not only does themethod reduce pigeon numbers, it also works to relocatepigeons from key areas of concern into a less sensitive area(where, for example, there is a less dense residential populationand/or fewer commercial properties affected by the damagecaused by pigeon droppings).

Following is a more detailed outline of some of the key featureslisted above.

1. Designated Feeding Areas and Dovecotes: Moving Pigeonsoff Problem AreasOne of the key concerns for many cities that contact PiCAS forassistance is how to control public feeding. City councils haveconventionally erected notices requesting that the public notfeed pigeons in certain sensitive areas or, in some cases, noticesprohibiting the feeding of pigeons. Public education literature,such as leaflets and signs, has also beenused often in an attempt to educatethe public about the issues. These areoften successful with the general publicbut not with deliberate and persistentfeeders. Prohibitive public educationcampaigns have often led to feeders’actually putting down more, not less,feed, and persistent feeders haveresorted to feeding late at night orearly in the morning to avoiddetection. This, of course, encouragesand sustains rodent and seagullpopulations as well as pigeon flocks.

PiCAS’ method seeks to address theneeds of persistent feeders by movingpigeons to less sensitive areas of thecity and allowing, but not encouraging,feeding on these sites, rather thanprohibiting feeding entirely. Feeders

are told by cities working with PiCAS that they can legitimatelyfeed pigeons within the designated feeding areas but not,under any circumstances, outside of them and that, if this isviolated, they will be prosecuted.

Once the pigeons have been attracted to the designated area bythe food offered, the dovecote will provide them with adaytime perching facility that will draw pigeons away from theirexisting daytime roosts, and the birds will also begin to use thedovecote as an alternative overnight roost. When pigeons havebecome familiar with the dovecote, it is likely that they will startto use it not only for daytime perching and overnight roosting,but also for the purpose of breeding. At that point, any eggslaid can be removed and replaced with dummy eggs on a dailyor weekly basis.

Juvenile pigeons will be the first to take up residence in thedovecote because mature adult breeding pairs will be reluctantto leave their existing overnight roosts, but once the existinglarge-scale roosts used by the adults (such as the lofts of disusedbuildings) have been pigeon-proofed or demolished and adultbirds excluded, it is likely that these adult birds will start to usethe dovecote as their new home, too.



SHIPLAPBOARDING

OPENING

CONCRETEFOUNDATIONS

SIDE ELEVATION

100X100POSTS

FINIAL

CEDAR SHINGLES

LAYERS OFNESTINGBOXES

OPENING

MA

INTE

NA

NC

E A

CC

ESS

HEI

GH

T

FRONT & REAR ELEVATIONS

ROOF PLAN (WITH MAIN FRAMEWORKSHOWN DOTTED)

CORNEREDGECOVER

LOCKABLEACCESS HATCH

PULL BOX HANDLES

PLAN SHOWING ONE LAYER OF NESTING BOXES

6 MM PLYWOOD FACE

TYPICAL NESTING BOX TO PIGEON CONTROLADVISORY SERVICE (PiCAS) SPECIFICATION(ENLARGED DETAIL)

2. Pigeon-Proofing and Deterrent Devices: Keeping Pigeons offProblem AreasBecause the feral pigeon is a direct descendant of the rock dove,a cliff-dwelling bird who roosted and nested on small ledges oncoastal cliffs, the favorite roosting and perching places forpigeons are city center buildings that simulate cliff faces andwindowsills and parapets that simulate ledges. Therefore,commercial property owners and leaseholders are normally themajor victims of pigeon-related damage. However, these partiesare often reluctant to spend money on pigeon-proofing theirproperties because many commercially available pigeon-proofing products break down and degrade very quickly, theinstallation quality is poor, or the productsthemselves are extremely expensive.

PiCAS emphasizes to property owners theimportance of pigeon-proofing in an effort toreduce pigeon occupancy and offers free, expert,,and independent advice on pigeon-proofing,often recommending alternative methods ofpigeon-proofing that cost a fraction of the cost ofthe commercially available counterpart. More onthis possibility is outlined below in the “benefitsand costs” portion of the report.

PiCAS normally recommends that local authoritiesproduce a leaflet or “round robin” letter forcommercial property owners explaining that thecity is working in partnership with PiCAS and that ifindependent help or advice on pigeon-proofing is required,they can contact PiCAS directly for advice. Obviously, once oneproperty owner has successfully pigeon-proofed a property, itwill be in the best interests of adjoining property owners to pigeon-proof also in order to prevent the pigeons from simply shifting residence.

Pigeon-proofing alone is not enough and must be used as partof the integrated strategy mapped above. If only pigeon-proofing is used, pigeons will merely move from one building tothe next. For the program to be effective, pigeons must not onlybe excluded but also drawn away from key areas, and theirnumbers must be reduced through egg removal.

3. Public Education: Getting the Community to Help YouTo ensure that pigeon numbers continue to decreaseindefinitely, a vigorous public education and information

campaign is a must. Members of the public and the commercialinterests in the community need to understand the purpose ofthe program and what it will achieve through their cooperationand support. Particularly, building owners need to understandthe importance of pigeon-proofing their properties todiscourage perching and to force pigeons away from existingroosts and onto artificial breeding sites. Members of the publicneed to understand why food for pigeons must be decreasedand that any food offered must be given in the designatedareas. The need for high standards of hygiene and upkeepoutside fast-food outlets and food shops must be emphasized tothe business owners to ensure that minimal commercial refuse is

left lying in the streets. Support should also besought from this quarter to display explanatoryposters and hand out leaflets to customers.

The educational campaign should focus on the factthat a reduction in available food will not result instarvation for large numbers of pigeons; it willsimply mean that pigeons will slow their breedingrate or stop it altogether. The PiCAS program,focusing on a reduction in feeding from the public’sperspective, must be understood to be a naturalway to control pigeon numbers as an alternative tolethal controls. The literature should be designedfor those who like and feed pigeons rather than formembers of the public who consider pigeons pestsand do not feed them.

In addition, PiCAS often recommends printing the PiCAS logoand contact information on distributed literature so thatconcerned residents can contact PiCAS directly for assurancesthat the program in place is the most humane solution. PiCASalso recommends stating that if the program is not compliedwith by the public and therefore proves ineffective, it is likelythat lethal controls may be considered in the future.

The Benefits and Costs of PiCASPiCAS’ integrated program saves money. It is useful to examinehow much is spent on control methods now, whether a PCO isbeing paid to trap or shoot pigeons or widespread poisoning ofpigeons is being conducted year after year. Over time, coupledwith the cleanup costs for buildings and statues that arebombarded with droppings from populations that never seemto go down, the cost of using lethal control methods can quicklyadd up.



PiCAS provides

free, expert advice

on pigeon-proofing

that costs a fraction

of the cost of the

commercially

available

counterpart.

In contrast, there is no cost to a city or company to consult PiCASand receive the benefit of its expert advice. PiCASrepresentatives do not take a fee for their time and effort—theyare only interested in making sure that a solution isimplemented that works for the people and the pigeons.

The only cost at the outset to explore how PiCAS can helppermanently solve a pigeon problem is the cost of a round-tripticket from the U.K. and accommodations for the PiCASrepresentative while in the U.S. (three to seven days).

Continuing outlay for the relative simplicity of the PiCASprogram and its lasting effectiveness means that costs are

comparatively low, particularly for labor expenses becausemaintaining the dovecotes and feeding areas does not requiremuch time. Furthermore, PiCAS offers to train and provideongoing support and advice to staff assigned to monitor thefeeding and nesting sites. PiCAS helps to keep the cost of theprogram low by working with the city to help locate commercialsponsors and funding in the community, which are oftenforthcoming because property owners are the prime targets ofpigeon-related nuisance and are therefore the most enthusiasticto get on board. Individual commercially sponsored cotes are agood way to get businesses involved and can even beconstructed, for example, as a replica of a business brand oricon.



✔ Basel, Switzerland: From 1988 to 1992, Basel halved itsstreet pigeon population through an integratedmanagement program. The city had previously triedtrapping, shooting, and oral contraceptives, all of whichfailed to effectively reduce pigeon numbers. Identifying thelimitation of food sources as the only solution, the world’sleading scientist in the field, Professor Daniel Haag-Wackernagel of the University of Basel, recommended thatthe city mount a public education campaign emphasizingthat public feeding was the root of the problem andexplaining the ultimate harm to the pigeons. Basel builtlofts in city buildings and established areas where feedingwas permitted near the lofts. Eggs were removed from thelofts, and during the four-year period of Haag-Wackernagel’s oversight, the pigeon population wasreduced by 50 percent.

✔ Augsburg, Germany: Augsburg currently has seven pigeonlofts in the city and is close to completing an eighth. Thenumber of lofts is expected to grow to 15 by the end of2006. In 2002 alone, 12,000 eggs were removed from thenew lofts. Augsburg has seen a marked reduction indamage to buildings because the pigeon droppings arecollected largely in the lofts.

✔ Aachen, Germany: After acknowledging that trapping andkilling pigeons was not making “any noticeable change” tothe pigeon numbers, Aachen has now installed sevenpigeon lofts that are maintained by volunteer staff and

activists. A spokesperson for the city said that the city wantsto continue with the integrated program because the loftsare producing the desired results.

✔ Paris, France: The city had tried conventional controlmethods but did not obtain satisfactory results, so in 2003,Paris put up its first pigeon loft. Paris has chosen to addle(shake) the eggs to prevent them from hatching. Theprogram has the support of the French Society for theProtection of City Birds. A spokesperson for the city said thatthe new plan works to “improve relations between Parisiansand these birds” and reduces the damage caused bydroppings.

✔ Nottingham City Hospital, U.K.: A good example of theeffectiveness of the PiCAS method in a commercial setting,the 60-acre hospital started killing some of its 1,200-strongresident pigeon population in 1999 but stoppedimmediately because of a public outcry. The hospital thenbrought in PiCAS to devise a humane control programandreduced its pigeon population by 50 percent within a year.The population in 2002 was further reduced to 360 birds,and a recent survey has counted only 62 resident birds onsite. This massive reduction was achieved exclusively byusing nonlethal methods of control. The hospital won the2003 Royal Society for the Protection of Animals (UK) BestPractice Award for its humane and effective program inassociation with PiCAS.

The PiCAS Method in Action: Proven and Ongoing SuccessesSome examples of places where this method has worked and is working to reduce and manage pigeon populations in Europeinclude the following:

As an example of construction and maintenance costs, theGerman city of Augsburg found it more expensive, according tothe city’s finance officer, to employ lethal controls andconstantly clean buildings than to introduce an integratedprogram. Currently, the city spends about $2,000 onconstruction materials for each dovecote or $15,000 if itcontracts to have the dovecote constructed. The dovecotes arecleaned and maintained two to three times a week, which takesapproximately three hours for each visit. Augsburg also usescommunity volunteers to keep costs low, and PETA can workwith communities to locate and organize volunteers to aid inrunning the PiCAS program.

If the more intricate and picturesque dovecotes such as thosefound in Augsburg are not desired, simpler features such aswall-mounted nesting boxes that can cost as little as $40 to $60each or pigeon “lofts” that cost $400 to $600 can beconstructed. All these options are effective and can simply betailored to suit the available budget and the aesthetics of thedesignated site. As long as the facility has been constructed withthe needs and behaviors of the pigeons in mind and has beenerected on an appropriate site, pigeons will begin to take upresidence and can be managed from the site.

Perhaps the biggest benefit for cities in adopting a PiCASprogram is the savings that PiCAS can arrange for commercialproperty owners in the city. As noted above, one of the keyfeatures of the PiCAS method is working with property ownersto ensure that their buildings are adequately and properlypigeon-proofed in order to make that area as unattractive topigeons as possible. Pigeon-proofing can be achieved through arange of deterrents such as anti-roosting spikes, and PiCAS hasextensive experience working with property owners todetermine how best to address their individual concerns.

PiCAS can offer the client sources for a wide range of controloptions and deterrents that will not only be completely effectivein the long term but also can be obtained at a fraction of thecost that a commercial PCO would charge. For example, PiCAShas a noncommercial relationship with a U.K. producer of anti-roosting devices that, having established a presence in Florida,can supply top-quality stainless-steel anti-roosting spikes to U.S.clients for less than even the wholesale price. U.S. clients whoconfirm that they will solely use nonlethal controls to addresspigeon issues can enjoy a further 15 percent discount on theseproducts, making the humane pigeon control option even morecost-effective.

It is also worthwhile to consider the possibility of offering afranchise to sell high-quality pigeon feed adjacent to thedesignated feeding area. This would ensure that the right foodwas offered to pigeons (rather than large quantities ofprocessed food that not only would be damaging to theirhealth, but might also attract rodents and seagulls), and itwould create revenue for the city to offset the costs involved incleaning and servicing the site.

PEOPLE FOR THE ETHICAL TREATMENT OF ANIMALS


Contact Information

Pigeon Control Advisory Service29 Victoria GreenWitchfordElyCambridgeshire CB6 2XBUnited Kingdom07981 945 [email protected] www.PiCAS.org.uk

Stephanie Boyles, Wildlife BiologistPeople for the Ethical Treatment of Animals501 Front St.Norfolk, VA 23510757-622-7382, ext. [email protected]

Sources Cited

Batz, Jeannette. “Pigeons Dropping.” St. Louis Riverfront Times 13 Jan. 1999 <http://www.urbanwildlifesociety.org/pigeons/PijPsnSt_LouisRivrFrtTimes.htm>.

Broughton, P.D. “Parisians Build Home for Pigeons in Suburbs.” London DailyTelegraph 8 Mar. 2003.

Der Spiegel. “War Against the Messengers of Peace.” 6 Jun. 2003.

Haag-Wackernagel, Daniel. “Regulation of the Street Pigeon in Basel.” WildlifeSociety Bulletin 23.2 (2002): 256-60.

Kanigher, Steve. “Family Files Suit Alleging Exposure to Pigeon Poison.” Las VegasSun 3 Dec. 2003 <http://www.lasvegassun.com/sunbin/stories/lv-other/2003/dec/03/515959641.html>.

Nottingham City Hospital. “Pigeon Control Update.” Dec. 2000<http://wingsoverus.org/pigeon/PDocNottinghamHospital.doc>.

people for the ethical treatment of animals · 2013-01-23 · and people for the ethical treatment...

Documents