Image: Chris Minihane
Because the birds act as natural waste disposers, without them, she said, people would loudly protest about animals killed on roads,.
Holden Richards told ABC11 that the birds unsettle him and that he does not consider them good neighbours. He said they mark their territory with droppings and have long, sharp talons, which makes them unwelcome on a roof. Linda Ostrand says she is being singled out.
A residential street in Hillsborough has become the setting for an unusual legal fight, with local officials taking a couple to court over dozens of vultures that residents say gather near their home. The case pits neighbours who want the birds gone against two residents who say they are being blamed unfairly. At stake is a practical question, how far does a person’s responsibility extend when wild animals settle near a house? What follows sets out the accusations, the defence, the rule changes the town has already made, and what remains undecided as the dispute moves forward through the courts. Residents of Queen Street say the problem has persisted for years. Richards watched vultures pull tiles off a neighbour’s house, and tiles later came off his own roof and landed in his garden, which he believes was the birds’ doing. He had to pay for the repair. He also believes almost every household nearby has complained to the town. In a response filed with the court, the couple denied feeding the vultures. They argued that the presence of birds proves nothing about who attracted them, comparing it to assuming that anyone wearing tennis shoes must be a Wimbledon player. She called the lawsuit ridiculous but accepted that officials must respond when somebody complains. A longtime wildlife rescuer, she also defended the role vultures play in the ecosystem.
