Jerra

That is assuming that a) cats like most predators don't choose the sick and weak which would have died from some other source b) That they aren't taking birds which are in the wrong habitat and aren't doing as well as possible. Cats, OK wild cats, were part of the UK natural fauna and not restricted to Scotland in times gone by, so domestic cats are probably just replacing natural predators. Domestic cats have been part of human society since at least Egyptian times it would seem strange if suddenly in the last 50 years or so they had suddenly started to have an effect on populations which they didn't have for a couple of millennia. Particularly when is past centuries they weren't as well fed and in many cases were expected to fend for themselves. For me however the telling point is the fact there is no scientific evidence and believe me it is not for the lack of looking. Many many people carry out scientific studies and population counts. For example 40,000 of us were involved in data gathering for the 2007-2011 Population Atlas. It is, to me at least, strange that people require proof for many things in life but grab hold of statements they agree with ignoring part of what is said, as Pete.i points out your statement is based on no evidence.

Could you give a reference for that please? As far as I know the British Trust for Ornithology who carry out all sorts of ornithology research have found no scientific evidence that the cats have reduced bird populations, so I would be interested to read the research on which you base that statement.

Birds seem to be being hit hard by avian flu also I find that at this time of the year food is still plentiful in the countryside so they are well spread out. Birds are monitored by many many organisations e.g. the BTO, BU and various local bird clubs such as the Cumbria Bird Club. I can't speak for other parts of the country but Cumbria Wildlife Trust have been running a scheme for a number of years to monitor insects particularly pollinators. Lots of Apps e.g. iNatura;list iRecord and Bird track gather data and feed it in to such things as the local Biodiversity Centre Humans! The government is still allowing some use of neonicotinoids. Natural habitats are being destroyed, some people (such as one member of this forum) feel the world can survive if we get rid of animals. Gardeners still use pesticides and prefer a garden which is "neat and tidy" leaving less room for wildlife hence the need for "No mow May". Support organisations doing what they can, for land based folk the BTO garden bird survey helps to show from year to year the ups and downs of each species, pressurise your MPs about environmental concerns etc etc Everybody can and should do something. As an example CBDC (our local biodiversity centre) points out that if common species e.g. mice aren't recorded it is very difficult to know when they are under threat and decreasing. Obviously everybody hasn't an interest in wildlife but those who do can with very little effort contribute a lot.

With the current "Teachers Professional Standards" document it would probably mean you never worked as a teacher again. However I had a colleague who met his wife while teaching in a boarding school, she used to sneak out, hide in his car boot and then he would drive to a remote pub. She was in the 6th form at the time. Another action which would lead to a sacking these days.

It is many years since I last took a boat on a river and yes the fuel and tank were clean and I was carrying an anchor. Incidentally dirty fuel and or lack of maintenance aren't the only reasons for a boat losing power, it is impossible to totally ensure nothing will go wrong. For the cost, size and weight of an anchor it seems IMO to be "spoiling the ship for a hap'orth of tar" to not have one.

Perhaps I should have been clearer. Most people I know and it would seem many on here would consider going on a river without an anchor seriously negligent. There is that better.