Could ‘Licence to kill’ be the solution to Scarborough’s seagull woes?

But seaside campaigners think they may have finally stumbled across the answer to the great seagull problem - in the form of a so-called “licence to kill”.

As the end of another summer plagued with gull attacks on the seafront nears, Scarborough councillor and avid gull campaigner Andrew Jenkinson says it’s time to take action. He wants residents and businesses to make use of a Natural England licence which allows people to legally destroy herring gulls’ nests and eggs and even kill some nuisance birds using semi-automatic guns or cage traps.

Coun Jenkinson said the licence is the biggest breakthrough yet in the fight to curb Scarborough’s out-of-control gull population.

“This is what we’ve been waiting for,” he said. “It’s too late to do something for this summer, but this is our chance to act now and ensure we are ready to act for next summer and finally nip the numbers in the bud.”

He plans on floating the idea of encouraging people to use the licence - part of a range of possible measures - before Scarborough Council ahead of next summer.

Other proposals -including using “anti-seagull” drones to sterilise eggs laid in hard-to-reach nests; painting pavement murals on the seafront to warn tourists not to feed gulls; and petitioning the Government for a gull cull - would need approval of his council colleagues, but it is the licence, which simply requires downloading from the internet, that he feels could make the biggest difference.

Scarborough Council also covers the coastal resorts of Whitby and Filey, which have also had gull problems. Its leader Coun Derek Bastiman told The Yorkshire Post he would be happy to support any initiative that makes life easier for residents and visitors when it came to the menacing birds.

The licence, which has been available from Natural England for around five years but is not widely known, could be used by council staff on land it owns.

He said: “This is an ongoing problem. Unfortunately it’s the irresponsible actions of certain people who feed the seagulls that makes it worse.”

Coun Bastiman said he would happily table a motion facilitating a discussion on the issue, and that it was only “right and proper” that members of the council had their say.

The licence can only be used under strict terms to “preserve public health and safety”, and the user must be satisfied that all legal methods of resolving the problem had become ineffective or impracticable.It covers killing or destroying the nests or eggs of a number of birds, including the lesser black-bearded gull, pigeons and even doves, but does not allow for the killing of herring gulls, just the destruction of nests and eggs.

But that is enough reason for one councillor to object. Dilys Cluer, leader of Scarborough Council’s Green Party group said: “I wouldn’t be happy with the idea of nests being removed,

“I think stopping them nesting before hand by placing spikes and what not is a much better way of dealing with this rather than waiting for eggs to be laid.

“I think it could be a bit hard to prove a nest is a health and safety risk - that risk comes later when the young are fledging and quite aggressive. But preventive measures are, in my opinion, a better way of tackling this.”