– Spikes. A series of prickly metal bars, a kind of “fakirs”, which are attached with glue or silicone to e.g. cornices. They make the animals insecure (that is also the intention), but can also injure them when landing. Especially young or weak individuals can be injured by these fakirs, as their wings can get stuck in the prickly metal spikes, and young birds do not have the strength to get free. Least evil.

– Cornices and other ledges are made so that they are slanted (more than 45°) that the pigeons cannot find a foothold on them. This is done, for example, with cement mortar or using metal sheets. Should not be carried out during the breeding season, when there may be chicks sitting on ledges/cornices/in nests. Few homeowners will spend money on this solution, but it is otherwise a good prevention.

– Thin stainless steel wire or nylon cord stretched a few centimeters above cornices or roof ridges. These wires do not retain their elasticity, and the wires become loose over time. Birds can therefore be injured or caught in the loose strings. One pest control company writes: ”You have to calculate and calculate a little maintenance on the system, as the wire can break or become loose over time, and it may therefore be necessary to repair the system.”. However, due to their location, the wire systems are not maintained. and many homeowners apparently do not think about the fact that they will have to pay for a lift to repair the system from time to time. This therefore poses a potential danger to all birds. Completely unacceptable.

– Holes in the walls are bricked up or provided with fine metal wire mesh.. This should definitely not happen during the breeding season. But wire mesh doesn't last forever, and if there are holes in it, it means that pigeons can get caught behind the net and die a slow death. Sometimes they get stuck if the net is too large-mesh, and even smaller birds can get through a large-mesh wire mesh, but can't always find their way back out. Unacceptable solution if regular checks are not carried out. Acceptable if regular inspections are carried out.

– Assert. Among the chemical control agents, sticky/sticky paste is an example. The intention is that the animal should feel uncomfortable landing on a soft substance. Sticky paste hardens over time, so it loses its effect and must therefore be reapplied. If the paste is not made non-stick with talc after application, birds can stick to it. The paste is applied in stripes on cornices, gutters, roof ridges, signs and poles that you do not want pigeons to sit on. Some companies claim that these bird pastes may not be purchased by private individuals and may only be used commercially by special companies. Yet one of the companies sells the paste in its online store. Unacceptable: It has been seen that pastes have been used that birds − especially small birds and young/weak individuals that do not have much strength − have stuck to. Completely unacceptable.

– Lubricant: other lubricants cause irritation to the pigeons' feet and legs and are supposed to deter the pigeons from landing. The birds will (allegedly) start to avoid these places. A Danish company advertises that "the latest method of scaring away birds consists of a paste that makes the birds think that the house is on fire. This forces swallows and pigeons to other areas". It sounds like a "neatly packaged" way of carrying out animal cruelty. In some places it is called Bird Gel. Unacceptable.

NEVER use polybutylene gel. Adhesive gel made from polybutene can harm all birds and other animals that come into contact with it. These agents must not be used. The feathers of birds that come into contact with the concentrated, sticky gel will be damaged and all or part of the plumage will be destroyed, which will destroy the water-repellent membrane on the feathers and can damage them so much that the bird will be unable to fly. This is animal cruelty and a violation of the law. These gel agents are not selective in terms of WHO lands on them. Other birds will probably also land on the gel, and smaller birds will not be able to get free, resulting in a slow death for the animal. According to foreign studies, it has also harmed larger birds such as barn owls and kestrels. Substances in the paste also leach into stone/concrete and discolor it, and the gel is therefore harmful to the building.

– Shooting: Completely unacceptable and completely useless. Pest control companies, municipalities or others tell the customer that once the birds have been shot and killed, the problem will be over; however, the opposite is the case and the pest control companies know it. Any form of “regulation” by shooting has been shown in studies in major European cities to INCREASE the size of the pigeon flock. Studies have also shown that the number of pigeons will increase not only to the number it was before the shooting, but to an even higher number. Therefore, the customer is sold a worthless and expensive “service”, and the whole session must be repeated every 6-8 weeks. Since it is almost impossible to kill a bird the size of a pigeon with a regular air rifle and this often happens at a great distance, a majority of the birds that are shot are only wounded. Due to the inaccessibility of sleeping and nesting places, it is practically impossible to find wounded birds, and as a result these birds are left to die a long and painful death. This is a clear violation of the Animal Welfare Act.

However, there is also a disadvantage for property owners: wounded birds will seek shelter on other, nearby properties – e.g. on a cornice, a notch in a building facade, in a roof space or the like, and this will have unpleasant consequences for the properties in question, as there will be rotting, dead birds in hard-to-reach places. Not to mention the aforementioned offense of letting a wounded animal die slowly from gunshot wounds. Foreign studies reveal that it is not uncommon for property owners to find dead and dying pigeons in various places on their property several days after the shooting.

– Laser light is used in some places against birds, but is considered "better" for birds other than pigeons. Laser light is definitely not safe to use where people and other animals are present, not least because of the risk of eye damage. Thoughtless artists now and then get permission from municipalities (which obviously don't really care about animal welfare) to make art projects with laser light in the cities. Thoughtless and completely unacceptable.

– On balconies it is often used to tighten nylon fishing line back and forth in front of the opening or hang net. The animals are at great risk of becoming entangled in the lines (which are soft and yield), getting caught in the net and thereby being injured or being caught behind it (including small birds that can get through the meshes). Unacceptable and thoughtlessly.

- By trapping special traps or decoys are set up. This is done by certain pest control companies, but private people sometimes try too, and without control and knowledge, become self-appointed bird catchers and killers. People may forget to supervise the traps, which may be left on a roof in strong heat/sun or in rain and wind for (perhaps) days. Furthermore, it is left to unskilled people to kill the animals. Finally, the method is unacceptable because it is deeply frustrating for a wild animal to be locked up and even more frustrating if it cannot get back to its eggs or live young. The pigeons will keep flying towards the sides of the trap to get out. COMPLETELY unacceptable from an animal welfare perspective. It has also been proven by a number of large studies that capturing birds – even on a large scale – does not help reduce the population at all – quite the opposite. Completely unacceptable.

– Capturing pigeons at night while they are sleeping. Unacceptable for the same reasons as previously stated: chicks and eggs in a nest, which is however located elsewhere. Thus, one parent bird is captured, and the other is left to care for the chicks all alone. In addition, very harsh (and completely unacceptable from an animal welfare perspective) and ineffective killing methods are used. As previously mentioned: the number does not decrease - on the contrary. Any form of “regulation” by capturing or shooting has been shown in studies in major European cities to INCREASE the size of the pigeon flock. Studies have also shown that the number of pigeons will increase not only to the number it was before the shooting, but to an even higher number. Animal cruelty. Unacceptable.

– Live rails affects all birds – not just rock pigeons. Completely unacceptable from an animal welfare perspective, similar to live wires placed around statues etc. Completely, completely unacceptable.

– Establishment of bird of prey nests in the city. It is a proposal that was put forward a few years ago by people who wanted to appear a little bit pompous and smart. Studies from other countries show that it has absolutely no effect and is also a big expense for a municipality. You have to face it, it involves one long animal cruelty, many people will find it very unpleasant and shocking to see birds of prey killing pigeons and other birds become everyday life. Unacceptable and completely useless.

– To rent a falconer to visit places in the city where pigeons live. Completely unacceptable: contains the same objection as before, is also an extremely expensive affair, and the killed pigeons may have young at home in the nest. The method has been tried in Trafalgar Square in London – the newspaper London Evening Standard wrote 21 September 2009: "The cost of flying a hawk to scare pigeons away from Trafalgar Square has soared to almost £60,000 a year. The bird of prey is flown daily for up to four hours as part of efforts introduced by former mayor Ken Livingstone to disperse birds he dubbed 'flying rats'. Since the scheme started in July 2003, a total of £354,829 has been spent on hawks and 130 pigeons have been killed. This equates to £2,729 spent per dead bird The Standard show that in the last financial year the scheme cost £59,020.”. The Guardian wrote: “should the hawks keep flying – or is it time Londoners learned to peacefully coexist with pigeons?” ( … or is it time Londoners learned to peacefully coexist with pigeons?) Several newspapers called it “blood sport on Trafalgar Square”.