People and Gulls Summit Event - Summary

• There was widespread agreement that gulls do cause issues for some people in our urban areas and the need for solutions to be implemented.
• It was important that we all had open discussions and were able to express our real lived experiences.
• Success will require continued discussion and transparency; this is about balancing the impacts on people and gull conservation.
• NatureScot and Scottish Government are committed to action and change, working in partnership with others across all interests.
• Overall, we need to consider the whole lifecycle of gulls – as such implementing meaningful long-term solutions will not be a quick fix.
• There are several tools available to help management of gulls which often don’t require a licence.  Licensed control is but only one option.
• We will promote the development of an overall Gull Management Strategy – learning from other similar approaches with a variety of species.
• While a national framework will help provide direction, it must be within the context of local solutions.
• We must keep learning from each other – different stakeholder groups are taking a variety of approaches to managing gull impacts.
• Across Scotland, better data and information is needed on overall gull population trends, their numbers in urban areas, and their use of urban and non-urban landscapes.
• For Licensing – transparency on the guidelines and actions is essential. The guidelines must tackle the range of situations reported and there must be no surprises to applicants.
• The solutions to develop a sustainable long-term approach to manage the problem belong with us all and lie in a commitment to partnership and a joined-up approach.
• We will all use the period from now to the nesting season next year to put in place actions – the winter period is key to plan and prepare for next year.
• Funding will be required of which the £100k from NatureScot is a start to prime this work.
• We need different solutions applied together and we NatureScot need to continually test, and sense check our approaches.

1. Run three regional roundtable events across Scotland to continue to develop a partnership approach with those not able to attend the gull summit, and to tackle the problem – joint approaches will have a better chance of getting funding to tackle the root of the problem.
2. Distribute the £100k that has been made available to assist local authorities to develop an area wide gull management approach. This area wide approach will:
   • better understand gull populations and their movements at a local level,
   • identify the range of measures that could be practically applied in different context,
   • identify areas with highest gull impact,
   • develop a strategic view as to where and how gulls can be moved on from areas of high impact,
   • provide a locally coordinated area-based licensing approach.
3. Develop a national awareness campaign to encourage people not to feed gulls and carry out proper waste management.
4. Continue to gather gull data nationally, with increased focus on improving survey techniques for gulls nesting in urban areas.
5. Develop best practice guidance to include:
   • Waste management in urban areas to limit food availability to gulls,
   • “Push” (moving gulls out of high impact urban areas) and “pull” (attracting gulls to areas where gull impacts are lower),
   • Survey techniques that assess local urban populations, movements, and high impact areas,
   • Study methodologies to assess the human behaviours that contribute to high gull impacts.
6. Consider the development of a regular People and Gulls Forum.

Four breakout sessions explored the challenges and practicalities of managing urban gull populations across Scotland. The following is a summary drawn from raw notes taken by scribes during the sessions. 

While views differed on specific tools and approaches, there was strong consensus that no single intervention is sufficient. Lasting success depends on coordinated national and regional approaches, consistent funding, evidence-based best practice, and public engagement.

Effectiveness of Management Tools

Participants agreed that most tools have limited impact when used in isolation. Lasers, falconry, spikes, and pyrotechnics were generally rated as ineffective or short-term, while habitat management and physical prevention such as cages and netting—when installed and monitored correctly—were viewed as methods with measurable success. However, even effective measures can displace gulls rather than resolve the issue. Participants stressed the need for scientific, peer-reviewed evaluation to establish what works, where, and why.

Waste Management and Food Sources

Across all groups, waste control was identified as one of the most critical factors in reducing gull problems. Fast food outlets, schools, and town centres provide abundant food sources that sustain urban colonies. Key actions proposed include:

• Enforcing business responsibility for waste and litter.
• Installing gull-proof bins and improving waste collection.
• Introducing powers to prevent public feeding.
• Rolling out public education campaigns (e.g. “Don’t Feed the Gulls”) to change social norms.
• Education, particularly in secondary schools, was seen as a long-term behavioural solution.

Building Design and Prevention

Participants agreed that prevention should start with better urban planning and building design. Recommendations included:

• Amending Scottish Government Technical Handbooks to discourage flat roofs in problem areas.
• Incorporating gull-proofing measures at the construction stage.
• Promoting habitat management by design to make urban areas less attractive to gulls.
• Examples from new schools highlighted how poor design perpetuates long-term costs and health concerns.

Data, Evidence, and Research

All groups highlighted a lack of robust data on gull populations and the effectiveness of preventions. Suggested actions:

• Conduct national and regional annual surveys to establish baselines.
• Create a shared national database of nesting sites, complaints, and management outcomes.
• Commission independent, science-led research and case studies to guide future decisions.

Collaboration, Licensing, and Governance

Delegates called for a coordinated national framework. Current licensing processes were seen as slow and inconsistent. Priorities include:

• Building mutual trust between NatureScot and local authorities.
• Developing clear, accessible national guidance on licensing and management tools.
• Establishing a national working group or a hub-and-spoke model linking councils, conservationists, and communities.

Education and Public Engagement

Education was widely recognised as the most powerful and underused tool. Participants proposed:

• National messaging campaigns to shift public behaviour.
• School-based projects linking gull issues to environmental awareness.
• Improved community engagement and transparency to increase public understanding that “the gull problem is a people problem.”

Funding and Next Steps

A major barrier remains insufficient and seasonal funding. Participants urged:

• Year-round investment to sustain long-term efforts.
• Collaborative funding models involving councils, businesses, and government.
• Exploration of “push–pull” strategies, including creation of safe nesting zones away from problem areas.
• Delegates concluded that education, enforcement, design, and data must work together within national and regional levels in a way that is evidence-led, well-funded, and consistently applied.

In conclusion, participants agreed that no single tool will solve the gull issue. Effective management requires joined-up national and regional strategies, education and enforcement, evidence-led decision-making, and sustained commitment from government, councils, businesses, and communities alike.