FW: ‘Swifts spark joy!’ Why these beautiful birds need our help – and 10 ways to give it | Environment | The Guardian
Mike Priaulx
Mike Priaulx
Mike Priaulx
Flora Blackwater
On 2 Apr 2026, at 21:24, 'Mike Priaulx' via swiftslocalnetwork <swiftsloc...@googlegroups.com> wrote:
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "swiftslocalnetwork" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to swiftslocalnetw...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion, visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/swiftslocalnetwork/4a671677-d245-4511-b3e6-6b9f0e41e619%40yahoo.com.
Tim Norriss
Hi Mike and all
--
Tim Norriss
Hi Mike and all
My view is that Anderson does the RSPB no favours at all with his comments. Saying ‘it’s likely that the loss of nesting sites is part of the picture’ is simply staggering. But of course that is the scientists’ response – read only what has been written by scientists and ignore everything else. I understand that – but don’t then continue to quote irrelevant stuff. It just shows how entrenched they and the BTO are that loss of insects are a major part of the problem. Despite them trying to prove it for many years they have come up with no credible evidence whatsoever. And the ‘six-legged elephant in the room’ comment is disgraceful whilst at the same time saying that recent research on swifts suggests “periods of the worst bad weather do affect their breeding success”. Wow, what a revelation, who would ever have guessed that!
And he quotes the research finding that a number of migratory bird species were leaving the UK underweight for their marathon journeys. The article doesn’t mention that the Common Swift is not one of the 33 species studied in that paper and therefore has no relevance whatever.
The inference from all these comments just continues the myth that the loss of insects must be a cause of the ongoing national decline. It isn’t. None of us like to be told we are wrong and its clear to me that scientists are largely doing the wrong research; although to be fair some of it is good and useful. But they seem completely ignorant of the great success stories by groups around the country which, by installing many boxes have hugely increased the Swift populations in their areas. This could not have happened if loss of insects was the problem. But they completely ignore that because it wasn’t done by scientists.
So here in Hampshire the cause of the decline has been loss of nesting sites and we have proved that in Winchester by linking the decline in natural sites (close to the national average) whilst still increasing the population overall by 43% in 7 years by installing hundreds of boxes. And don’t tell me that ‘Hampshire is different’ as the BTO have done, because it isn’t. This can be done anywhere (and has been in many places). So what do I think is the historical effect of ‘loss of insects’ on the Swift population? Precisely zero. As a human race we are very slow to change our minds on things that we have been told or taught as true. One only has to consider religion and politics to quote just two.
Tim Norriss
Hampshire Swifts
From: 'Mike Priaulx' via swiftslocalnetwork <swiftsloc...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: 02 April 2026 21:24
To: Digest recipients <swiftsloc...@googlegroups.com>
Subject: [SLN] Insects in Guardian article
I was surprised insects are described as "the elephant in the room" when their impact has been discussed and researched throughout the few years I've been involved and I'm sure much longer.
--
Tanya Hoare
Mike - Your own summary of the topic is excellent and to the point.
b/w
To view this discussion, visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/swiftslocalnetwork/16E3F175-FED1-4F4D-89C5-CA93AE474AA0%40gmail.com.