August “D-day” for annual guga hunt


Nature Scot have announced that they will make a decision on whether to licence this year’s guga hunt on the 3rd August, amid real concern that the organisation is seeking to actively change its position in response to pressure from protest groups.
The annual harvest of young gannets has been undertaken by the Ness community for generations, with no impact on the sustainability of the population of the birds on Sula Sgeir, the rocky outcrop north of the Butt of Lewis where the harvest takes place at the end of summer.
No licence was applied for by the men of Ness from 2021, as a result of Covid and then avian flu, and was only restarted last year as stocks had recovered. Nature Scot, however, reduced the license permission from 2,000 to 500.
However, in the past few months a vicious campaign has been waged by self-confessed eco-warriors, with the Ness community being accused of “baby bashing” and of following a “backward” tradition.
Regular protests have also been held outside the offices of Nature Scot, who are responsible for issuing the license, in Inverness.
Following a paper presented by licensing officer Chris Dailly and Robbie Kernahan, the director of green economy, a board meeting held earlier this month decided that a Habitats Regulations Appraisal was now needed to determine whether the hunt “will impact the North Rona and Sula Sgeir Special Protection Area”. The SPA was classified in 1994 - 32 years ago.
In their report and recommendation to board members, Mr Dailly and Mr Kernahan “concluded that the hunt is likely to cause a significant effect on North Rona and Sula Sgeir SPA”.
The subsequent public statement by Nature Scot announcing the date of the decision also refers to the matter of “humane killing”.
It comes after what appeared to be a deliberately timed letter to the Scottish Government from the Scottish Animal Welfare Commission, in the name of its chair Professor Cathy Dwyer from Scotland’s Rural College, which concluded that they were “unaware of a humane way to dispatch guga that is feasible”.
However, the letter also added that the “the hunt for and consumption of guga are of cultural significance and no doubt you, your officials and NatureScot will take that into account”.
While animal rights activists have concentrated their efforts on the Ness guga hunt, there has been strong support for its continuation from within the islands, with formal support from Comhairle nan Eilean Siar, the local community estate Urras Oighreachd Ghabhsainn, MSP Donald Mackinnon and MP Torcuil Crichton.
In a statement published online, Nature Scot said: “We understand there are strong feelings about the guga hunt, and that some people will disagree with it taking place.
The hunt is recognised in law under the Wildlife and Countryside Act, which makes specific provision for the granting of a licence for the purpose of providing food for human consumption in relation to the gannets on the island of Sula Sgeir. Our role is to make licensing decisions based on the most recent scientific evidence.
“In 2025, we received our first licence application from the Men of Ness since 2021. After reviewing the survey data, collected in 2024 following bird flu outbreaks, we reduced the maximum number of birds that can be taken from 2,000 to 500 and a licence was granted on the condition that all birds must be killed humanely. This ensures the gannet population on Sula Sgeir remains stable for the future. The 2025 licence has now expired.
“A licence application for 2026 has been received. We will assess it as required by the relevant legal frameworks and using the most recent scientific evidence and make our determination of the application on 3 August.”
It added: “NatureScot has received a number of emails for the attention of our Board in relation to our licensing role.
“Our Chair is considering these and will be seeking guidance from our licensing team to inform future discussions with our Board. We thank those who have contacted us for highlighting their concerns clearly and constructively.
“However, given the volume of correspondence received we are unfortunately unable to respond individually.”