Provision of supplementary food for wild birds may increase the risk of local nest predation

In countries such as the UK, USA and Australia, approximately half of all households provide supplementary food for wild birds, making this the public's most common form of active engagement with nature. Year‐round supplementary feeding is currently encouraged by major conservation charities in the UK as it is thought to be of benefit to bird conservation. However, little is understood about how the provision of supplementary food affects the behaviour and ecology of target and non‐target species. Given the scale of supplementary feeding, any negative effects may have important implications for conservation. Potential nest predators are abundant in urban areas and some species frequently visit supplementary feeding stations. We assess whether providing supplementary food affects the likelihood of nest predation in the vicinity of the feeder, by acting as a point attractant for potential nest predators. We provided feeding stations (empty, peanut feeder, peanut feeder with guard to exclude potential nest predators) in an area of suburban parkland in the UK and monitored the predation rate of eggs placed in artificial nests located at distances that replicated the size of typical suburban gardens. Nest predators (Magpies Pica pica, Grey Squirrels Sciurus carolinensis) were frequent visitors to filled feeders, and predation caused by Magpies, European Jays Garrulus glandarius and Grey Squirrels was significantly higher when nests were adjacent to filled feeders. The presence of a feeder guard did not significantly reduce nest predation. As supplementary feeding is becoming increasingly common during the breeding season in suburban habitats, we suggest that providing point attractants to nest predators at this time may have previously unconsidered consequences for the breeding success of urban birds.