Haith's Response to the RSPB's Recent Bird Feeding Guidance - May 2026.
Share
Our Response to the RSPB's Recent Bird Feeding Guidance
Over the past few weeks, we have received a very large number of emails, phone calls and comments from distressed people who are feeling confused, worried and uncertain following the recent changes to garden bird feeding advice announced by the RSPB and supported by partner organisations, including the BTO.
Some people now believe they should stop feeding birds altogether. Others are unsure whether seeds and peanuts are suddenly considered unsafe during spring and summer. Many more are simply asking the same honest question:
“What should I do now?”
We wanted to respond calmly, carefully and honestly because there is clearly a great deal of uncertainty among people who genuinely care about birds and who are trying to do the right thing.
First, it is important to say clearly that disease risk is real. Finch trichomonosis is a serious disease, and concerns around bird health should never be dismissed lightly. Good hygiene matters. Clean feeders matter. Fresh food and clean water matter. None of that should be controversial.
The science behind the recent recommendations also deserves to be taken seriously, and it is only fair to acknowledge that organisations such as the RSPB and BTO have spent considerable time reviewing evidence and discussing disease transmission risks associated with supplementary feeding.
However, it is equally important to recognise that the science itself is still evolving, and this has now been publicly acknowledged by some of the scientists involved in the review process.
In a recent BTO article discussing the updated guidance, Dr Kate Plummer wrote that the recommendations reflect a “precautionary approach” and that action is being taken “even if the evidence is not complete.” (BTO.org).
That distinction is important because precautionary science is not the same thing as settled certainty, and many members of the public may not yet fully appreciate that difference. But there is a difference.
The RSPB has also clarified in correspondence that the literature review focused specifically on studies examining links between supplementary feeding and disease risk, rather than attempting to examine all wider ecological factors associated with finch decline. In other words, the review wasn't designed to be the full story of why finches are declining, nor the complete picture of all the environmental pressures birds now face.
This is a complex issue involving disease ecology, feeding behaviour, habitat loss, declining insect abundance, environmental stress, farming changes, hygiene, bird aggregation and wider ecological disruption, all interacting together in landscapes that are already changing rapidly.
The problem is not that disease risk has been raised. It should be raised.
The problem is that a precautionary, still-evolving evidence base appears to have been translated into a public message that many people have understood as far more certain, final, and sweeping than the science itself may currently support.
Once the guidance moved into television, newspapers and social media, much of that complexity appeared to collapse into a far simpler public message:
“Stop feeding birds.”
Whether intended or not, that is how many ordinary householders appear to have interpreted the guidance, and from our perspective, that has created significant public confusion.
At Haith’s, we have heard from people who have removed feeders entirely, become frightened of harming birds, stopped feeding during nesting season, or felt guilty despite feeding responsibly for years. Others are deeply confused because they are simultaneously being told that feeding may be harmful while actively watching robins, sparrows, blackbirds and fledglings continuing to use their gardens every single day.
In contrast, we have also heard from many customers who say they have always cleaned their feeders carefully, monitored bird health closely, and intend to continue feeding seeds and peanuts throughout the year as part of a responsible feeding routine. Many feel that hygiene, sensible quantities, fresh food, clean water and avoiding overcrowding are the key issues, rather than abandoning supplementary feeding altogether. Even then, many say they are now prepared to redouble their efforts because programmes such as Secret Garden (BBC) – narrated by Sir David Attenborough and other nature documentaries continue to remind people of the importance of gardens and small green spaces as stepping stones for wildlife in an increasingly pressured world.
The abrupt nature of the announcement, amplified by headlines, television, and social media, risks undoing much of the good that responsible supplementary feeding has achieved over many decades.
That risks throwing the baby out with the bathwater because supplementary feeding is not only about food. Done properly, it supports birds, encourages observation, builds care for wildlife, and gives millions of people a daily connection with nature. In many cases, it is one of the first and most accessible ways people begin to notice, value, and ultimately care about the natural world around them.
For many people, especially older or less mobile individuals, garden birds are their most regular daily contact with the natural world, bringing routine, calm, companionship and genuine emotional wellbeing. We should not underestimate the value of that relationship, either for people or for the wider culture of caring about wildlife.
At the same time, gardens themselves increasingly matter. Habitat loss, development pressure, changes in farming, fewer insects and the gradual decline of hedgerows and wild spaces mean that millions of gardens now form part of a much wider patchwork of support for wildlife across the country.
If people lose confidence and turn away from feeding altogether, birds may lose more than a feeding point. They may lose part of a national network of gardens, care and attention that has helped keep ordinary people engaged with wildlife for generations.
None of this means disease risk should be ignored, but neither should a practical middle ground be lost.
One of our biggest concerns is that this could have become an important opportunity to educate the British public about responsible feeding practices in a calm, balanced and practical way. There was an opportunity to talk openly about feeder hygiene, sensible feeding quantities, reducing overcrowding, rotating feeding areas, avoiding build-up beneath feeders, maintaining clean water, and helping people observe bird behaviour more carefully and confidently.
Instead, too much of the public conversation has become dominated by uncertainty, anxiety and alarm-based headlines.
We are also aware that many people have struggled to reconcile strong public messaging around pausing seeds and peanuts with the continued visibility of RSPB-branded seed and peanut products through some retail channels.
Following direct correspondence, the RSPB clarified that reordering through trade partners has been switched off and that the remaining stock in external retail systems is outside their direct control. Even so, listings showing wording such as “in stock”, “more stock on the way”, and Subscribe & Save understandably added to public confusion at a time when clarity was especially important.
There is also concern that such a major public intervention affecting millions of bird feeders appears to have been developed and announced without meaningful engagement with much of the specialist bird food industry, despite decades of practical experience within the sector relating to bird feeding behaviour, hygiene, feeder design, seasonal feeding patterns and public education.
So where does Haith’s stand?
Our position remains simple: We help people feed birds properly, with confidence.
That means taking disease risk seriously while also encouraging practical, responsible feeding practices rather than fear-driven withdrawal. It means supporting hygiene, clean feeders, fresh food, sensible quantities, reduced overcrowding and careful observation of bird health. It also means recognising that feeding birds responsibly and thoughtfully is very different from simply abandoning feeding altogether.
We do not believe panic helps birds.
We believe responsible feeding does.
For those seeking calm, practical and veterinary-led guidance, we would strongly encourage reading Professor John E. Cooper’s advice on responsible feeding and bird health here: https://haiths.com/pages/bird-health-and-responsible-feeding
This conversation will continue to evolve as more evidence emerges and understanding develops further, but whatever changes in the months and years ahead, one thing should remain constant:
