Index  ›  world  ›  New Dispatch

One of Britain's most prestigious tennis clubs slammed for hiring marksman to shoot geese

New Dispatch Published Aug 6, 2026 Reviewed Aug 7, 2026 ✓ Reviewed by citations.press editors
One of Britain's most prestigious tennis clubs slammed for hiring marksman to shoot geese
St George's Hill Lawn Tennis Club killed eight Canada geese, including goslings, on July 16, 2024.
8 · Canada geese
Adult Canada geese produce about two pounds of droppings per day.
2 lbs · Adult Canada geese
The population of Canada geese in the UK has more than doubled since 1984.
more than 2 · Canada geese in the UK
The number of Canada geese in Wales increased by 753 percent between 1995 and 2024.
753 % · Canada geese in Wales
The first Canada geese were received in Britain in 1664.
1664 · Canada geese in Britain

Members of one of Britain's most prestigious tennis clubs have been left fuming after the venue arranged for marksmen to shoot its resident Canada geese at dawn.

Neighbours of the St George's Hill Lawn Tennis Club in Weybridge, Surrey, reported hearing gunfire at 5.25am on July 16.

It subsequently emerged that eight birds had been killed, among them goslings.

The club, which once hosted British tennis star Emma Raducanu, carried out the cull without informing its membership in advance.

The operation was authorised under a Natural England licence permitting the killing of certain bird species on public health or safety grounds, with an adult goose and one gosling surviving.

Members who spoke on condition of anonymity expressed deep unhappiness with the decision.

One long-standing player told The Times: "The members have always liked the geese. It is sometimes a bit annoying because they amble on to the courts and leave their poo. But that does not mean they had to be shot.

"It's a private estate and the residents are concerned about a firearm being brought in without any warning."

Another member described the birds as "adored and loved" and said the club initially told people the geese had been rehomed, then claimed they had "flown off", adding: "The members and local residents are furious."

A fellow player criticised the lack of consultation, saying management acted unilaterally because they considered the birds untidy.

Miles Hill, the club's chief executive, defended the cull, saying: "This was not a decision the club wished to take, nor one that was taken lightly.

"It followed many months of attempting to manage a growing resident population of Canada geese through enhanced cleaning and non-lethal measures."

Mr Hill cited public health and safety as the primary justification, noting that despite daily cleaning efforts by multiple groundskeepers, staff could not cope with the sheer quantity of droppings being produced.

Adult Canada geese defecate roughly every six minutes, generating around 2lbs per bird each day.

He said the club deliberately limited prior knowledge of the operation to ensure it was conducted safely and effectively, adding that this "reflected a genuine desire to avoid causing unnecessary concern, distress or alarm over what was a lawful operational matter".

Following the backlash, Mr Hill said the club "had reflected carefully on the events of July 16" and was now developing a revised wildlife management strategy prioritising habitat management and humane deterrence, with lethal measures reserved as an absolute last resort.

He acknowledged that new geese had already arrived at the club's lake, underscoring why prevention rather than relocation would form the basis of future policy.

Canada geese have a long history in Britain, thought to date back to 1664 when King Charles II received the birds as a gift from a Russian ambassador.

They were originally housed in St James's Park in central London, with the British Trust for Ornithology saying numbers of the birds in the UK have more than doubled since 1984.

The Royal Society for the Protection of Birds reported in April that the number of Canada geese in Wales increased by 753 per cent between 1995 and 2024.

The Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals says "wherever possible [the charity] would always prefer non-lethal solutions and lethal control should only be considered if there is a serious problem and non-lethal means are ineffective or impractical".

This article was originally published by New Dispatch ↗. citations.press indexes the source-backed facts above and links to the original. Something wrong? Corrections policy · Report an error