Cormorant and Aquaculture Conflict: Non-Lethal Management Approaches

Cormorants cause economic losses at fish farms and recreational fisheries. Evidence-based non-lethal management reduces conflict while protecting welfare of protected birds.

Key Facts

The great cormorant is protected under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981
Licences for lethal control are issued annually but non-lethal alternatives are preferred
Netting over ponds is the most effective non-lethal deterrent for cormorants
Laser deterrents, acoustic scarers, and human disturbance provide partial protection
Cormorant populations have recovered significantly since 1970s protection
Conflicts occur primarily at inland fish farms and put-and-take trout fisheries

Welfare Considerations

Cormorant management involves balancing wildlife protection with legitimate economic interests. Lethal control under licence causes welfare harm to protected birds and does not permanently resolve conflict where breeding populations are large. Non-lethal exclusion through physical barriers is consistently the most effective strategy. Shooting cormorants causes distress in surviving flock members due to their social nature. Proactive netting investment eliminates the need for lethal control in most aquaculture contexts.

What You Can Do

Support fish farms and fisheries investing in non-lethal cormorant exclusion infrastructure
Advocate for non-lethal deterrents to be required before lethal control licences are granted
Report concerns about unlicensed cormorant persecution to the police or RSPCA