RICHARD Bridges must have received quite a shock when he was attacked by a buzzard in a quiet country lane.

According to a recent front page report in the Evening News, the errant predator had broken away from its companion high in the sky and flown down to take a look at the retired group captain.

But little did the ex-serviceman know that the creature was in fact coming in low for a strafing run.

Group Captain Bridges recalled: "One stayed high, but the other swooped down to take a closer look at me.

"I carried on walking, lost sight of it, and then it came from behind and attacked the back of my head. I fell to the floor and a passing motorist saw what happened and picked me up."

Alarmingly, according to the victim, this was the second time he had been the target of the winged assailants.

I suppose that "watch out for the raptor in the sky" doesn't quite have the same ring as "beware the Hun in the sun" but such considerations will almost certainly have been the very least of the former RAF man's worries.

For as far as he is concerned, the aerial assault at Kerswell Green between Kempsey and Kinnersley was very real. Frightening, even. For he required hospital treatment after sustaining three wounds to his head.

Anyway, posters have now been put up warning anyone travelling in the area that they do so at their own risk. Apparently, five attacks have been recorded - four in the past month - with one incident even involving a bird swooping at the aerial on a moving car.

However, it would appear that it's not just buzzards that are dive-bombing humans. Reports are coming in from ramblers in the Midlands and the South West that Alfred Hitchcock's horror film The Birds is coming true, with more and more incidents occurring.

And the culprits are just as likely to be gulls. In St Ives, Cornwall, visitors have been attacked by the seabirds which are becoming increasingly smarter and more ruthless. They line up on rooftops, lying in wait for unsuspecting victims idling along with food in their hands.

The birds will eat almost anything, including fish, chips, pies, pasties and ice-creams.

Peter Exley, public affairs manager for the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds, said: "There is evidence that some gulls are becoming less scared of humans. An animal that has lost its fear can be dangerous."

And a torn and battered Group Captain Bridges added: "I love birds as much as anyone, but the welfare of humans must come first. The birds need to be destroyed."

Well, I sympathise with his hurt and anger. Nevertheless, I think we need to sit back, calm down a bit, and take a long and rational look at this whole issue of bird attacks. For a start, we should definitely rule out harming these creatures in any way, shape or form.

Earlier this year, this paper carried a report about the so-called seagull population explosion in Worcester. A number of people became very excited about the idea of reducing their numbers by dipping eggs in paraffin.

A "seagull expert" was even wheeled on and pictured holding a gull egg as if it was one of Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction. The subject of the photograph wore a suitably grim expression as he clutched the speckled egg, careful not to drop it for fear of causing a cataclysm of some sort.

So let me set you a test. What really, really bothers you most about Worcester? Is it a) yobs on the streets b) drunks on the riverbank c) seagulls flying about or d) the ever-mounting litter problems and associated vandalism?

Please list in order of importance and don't send your answers on a postcard.

You see, I have a real problem with people who want to kill any creature that interrupts their lives in any way. A couple of years ago, I had a conversation with a bad-tempered pigeon fancier who was going crazy on the phone because I had written that it was of no concern if peregrine falcons picked off the occasional slow bird.

He was only doing what peregrines are good at, I said. Oh no, said Mr Pigeon-Fancier, "have you ever seen what a peregrine can do to a pigeon's back? Well, I have!" he screeched down the line.

Sorry, my friend. That is Nature, proverbially red in tooth and claw, and if you don't know that, then go back to school.

The stumbling block here is that many people believe Nature is cruel. But cruelty can only be fuelled by an intellect. Which is why, out of all the animals, only Man has that uniquely distasteful trait.

It is hard to say when Man first began to classify animals in this human fashion, but probably occurred when he began to gain superiority over other creatures for whom he had hitherto served as prey.

For example, Man does not mind in the least if, in the wild, some animal hunts creatures for which he has no use. Woe betide, however, if he captures an animal Man considers his exclusive property.

It does not matter if the predator captures a frog or lizard. But great will be the hue and cry if, in periods of drought when the pools dry up and prey is scarce, this selfsame animal takes a pheasant chick.

It doesn't matter if the woods are full of chicks. Man is upset because he lays claim to this bird and because the predator has deprived him of a tasty dish of wildfowl.

In fact, the entire fox-hunting argument seems to hinge on this idea. Foxes do occasionally take poultry, and even more rarely, they snatch a lamb. And that is why they are hunted.

But the fox is an opportunist. He prefers to scavenge, grab a lazy rabbit or pick up slugs and snails in the evening dew.

But as they used to say in my home village - if you don't want the fox to take your chickens, better build a stronger pen.

What worries me about this whole issue is the almost automatic assumption that an animal's life is of so little account that the first time it offends humankind then it must die.

And yes, I have no doubt whatsoever that Group Captain Bridges' experience in that country lane was unpleasant, painful and perhaps a little frightening. But please, can we place such relatively rare events in perspective? The birds were almost certainly defending their nests or territory from a perceived threat.

Buzzards are now certainly a lot more plentiful than they once were. At one time, because of persecution by gamekeepers, they were unknown east of Tenbury Wells. Now, thanks to more enlightened policies and attitudes, this raptor is seen for what it is - predominantly a carrion eater that plays an essential part in the food chain.

They are not so much sinners, rather sinned against.

So. I hope the Group Captain's wounds are healing well and he may soon once more walk down his favourite country lane without fear of attack from above. But in the meantime, let no one even think about harming such a beautiful bird.

Even if it has slipped from grace as well as its perch - and come rather too close for comfort.