Dana Kelly

May 1, 2020
Human Dimensions Survey Summary
Wildlife Management ENVL 3121

Ocean City Mayor Jay Gillian wrote in a letter posted on the town’s website, “Some
people think it’s funny to feed the gulls and see them swarm, but the birds have become
increasingly aggressive and are snatching food out of people’s hands, posing a public safety
hazard.” This statement was made following a tourist season in NJ full of seagull-human
interactions, during which a bird expert named Erik Swanson noted that birds were developing
advanced tactics like biting people with the goal of getting them to drop their food (Corasaniti,
2019). These advanced tactics are seen in other forms as well; in Massachusetts data shows that
gulls get most of their food through people in parking lots. Due to their adaptability the gulls
learned time spent in the parking lot leads to free food. (Mass. DCR, 2010)
Not only does food offered to seagulls create negative behavioral side effects, it also
creates long term health problems. The food offered to seagulls by humans is typically bread,
crackers, and french fries; all items that are nutritionally inferior to natural gull diets that could
result in long term health problems (Mass. DCR, 2010).
In Ocean City, fines for feeding gulls and the introduction of prey birds as management
have been implemented to help curb the aggressive seagulls. However, considering the large
human dimensions aspect of this, I conducted a survey titled “Beach/Boardwalk Wildlife
Survey” and asked questions about human interaction with seagulls and the way people perceive
seagulls. The overall goal of this survey was to look at the correlation between the level of
nuisance people found seagulls to be and the amount of people who inadvertently may encourage
this “nuisance” behavior, and then determine whether or not education may aid in ending
aggression in seagulls.
This survey was created with google forms and deployed online to a small group of
college students (18-25) with various majors from different universities, the facebook friends of
my mom (haha), and sent to a few mutual friends. When originally constructed, the target
audience was anybody who had gone to a beach and boardwalk, with hopes of at least fifty
people taking the survey. Good news: 54 people took it.
One of the most significant results of the survey was that despite the fact 24.1% answered
that they only go to the beach 0-10 per year, only 20% checked “No.” to “Have you experienced
close proximity with seagulls that involved a form of unwilling/unwanted contact on your
behalf?” Some of the no answers can be accounted for with the fact the individuals who checked
no also willingly feed seagulls and enjoy the contact. Thus, it wouldn’t be unwanted on their
behalf. Being a majority of people who checked no for “Have you experienced close proximity
with seagulls that involved a form of unwilling/unwanted contact on your behalf?” also checked
yes for “Have you willingly fed seagulls? Check all boxes that apply to your experience(s) of
feeding.” suggests that almost everybody who partook in the survey had some form of contact
with seagulls.
Questions regarding how people felt about seagulls;
“Rate how you feel about the presence of seagulls on beaches/boardwalks on a scale of 1-7. (1
suggesting the highest level of dislike, 4 being neutral, and 7 being the highest level of
enjoyment felt towards their presence.)” and “If interactions were experienced, did interactions
with seagulls wildlife leave any effect? If so, rate the effect from 1 being a bad experience with
hopes of no recurrence, 4 being neutral, and 7 being an enjoyment of the experience with hopes
of reoccurrence.”
Generally came up with neutral results. So did the question asking whether or not people had
willingly fed seagulls; though 57.4% said they’ve never willingly fed seagulls, which is good.
One last interesting factor is that of public education. Those who voted no on public
education answered some questions as followed; One had a rated all seagull experiences as low
and wanted something to be changed but had never received public education nor wanted any
and had also willingly fed seagulls; One only visits 0-10 times a year and never experienced
unwilling contact but has willingly fed; One enjoys seagulls and seeks out the experience, and
has seen a no feeding sign; One doesn’t really dislike seagulls but doesn’t really enjoy their
presence either, and does want something changed, but doesn’t want education and has willingly
fed.
While a broader range of people as well as further analysis of the questions could
definitely bring this survey to further potential, overall I think it served its purpose. In general,
while many people don’t do it often, feeding seagulls is done by many, even those who find them
a nuisance. However, public education may be able to curb this issue.