A protest at NatureScot’s headquarters in Inverness has taken an unexpected turn, after a seagull campaign group accused activists of damaging a long established nesting site during their rooftop demonstration.
The incident follows an early morning protest linked to opposition to the guga hunt, where two activists climbed onto the roof of the Leachkin building and displayed a banner calling for an end to the practice.
But in a twist that has sparked debate online, the Seagull Appreciation Society has criticised the protest, claiming the actions of the demonstrators may have caused harm to nesting birds on the roof.
The group, which says it has more than 75,000 members, argues that the site has been used by seagulls for over two decades and should have been treated with care.
A spokesperson for the society said:
“As bird lovers we cannot understand why those who are trying to protect gannet chicks from guga hunters decided to disturb a protected seagull nesting site and potentially destroy seagull nests while walking across a flat roof in darkness.
The statement went on to highlight concerns about the wider impact of the protest.
“The actions of these two irresponsible individuals have meant that a significant number of emergency service personnel have been at the scene all day.
“This means that the seagulls which NatureScot have allowed to nest over the last 20 years have been scared away and any eggs they have laid will now be cooled to the point that they will never hatch.”
The group concluded with a stark assessment of the situation.
“In trying to save the young gannets these idiots have killed our beloved seagulls.”
The Seagull Appreciation Society, which operates through a large online community, says it exists to protect the interests of seagulls across the United Kingdom.
The incident has added a new layer to an already contentious issue, with questions now being raised not only about the future of the guga hunt, but also about how environmental protests are carried out.
The clash highlights the complexity of wildlife debates, where the protection of one species can quickly come into conflict with the welfare of another.
What began as a protest over tradition and conservation has now opened up a wider conversation about responsibility, impact and unintended consequences.
