So what do you all think? There is a balance to be struck, being a stalking forum I know we'd all like plentiful stalking but on the other hand effective deer management has to be maintained for many reasons including conservation. 12,000 deer in 15 years, is it really that excessive if they considered the numbers to be in excess of what the land could support in the first place? Total numbers falling from 3000 to the new target of 1650, almost half the number of deer. I'm just curious as to what people think, I'm a bit unclear on all this.
You can't say muntjac without saying, Mmmmmm.
I think we can all see what they'd like to happen but its the way they go about these things thats wrong.
There has been quite a few debates on here about Mar and other deer forests regarding the pro's and cons of regeneration. When you look at the BBC report here it says it all. They want the deer on one portion of the estate but not on the other. And woe betide any deer that cross this imaginary border! Remember though this border has no fence, no deep ditch, no its a line drawn on a map. And I'm pretty sure the deer arn't that great at reading maps!!
I could go on but I've said it all in previous posts.
Same he for me it was the play ground for a llarge portion of the goverment deer sector but now the numbers are down they will play some were else. If you look at the £millions they have spent doing it there way helicoptors mass culls pats on the back ill show you mine if you show me yours type of thing, and have now decided to use deer fences (which they were advised to do from the start and it would have been the hceapest opton hey ho and these chaps are setting every one up for a real fall should the voluntary sector fail deer managment before 2014. be afraid be very afraid.
OK we regenerate pine forest. First question is why? We create an area of trees. Biodiversity no longer supports that type of forest. Wolves, beaver etc are history. The most valueable resource was the deer and not just for shooting. People came to see the deer. The trees may attract the botonists but I dont see caravansites to 5* hotels filling to see the lesser spotted maggot. Black grouce and caper might get back in but forestry allows too many foxes and badger as well as raptor to see much comeback,
Well if you look at the video there is not a shortage of planting already/ the regen is 15,000 hectre 37,000 acres. now probably 50% will be rock face unsuitable for growth. Natural regen will be mostly rown, birch, willow and some pine that will take 60 years to mature in style. meanwhile deer would need to be culled indefinately. Again I ask what purpose will it serve. Move it south of Lochtay where reds are not that plentyfull and you can achieve the same without the slaughter.
I would love to have been given the task to re-forest Mar as much of the area should be wooded (trees love rock faces by the way) however I would have used fences. The danger with a reduction cull and no fencing is that the remaining deer still have access and may well remove trees seedlings in huge numbers as they feed. Add to this a rapid bulking -up of ground cover and mosses you end up with few trees and a poor seedbed. Regeneration can still occur but it takes ages and deer need to be kept down.
Having said that, I still believe that we do not do enough for our native woodlands and I will support any effort to protect/expand them. Deer will ultimately benefit from the improved feed and excellent shelter.
By the way, why is it that stalking a single deer is “sport”, nabbing two is “good sport”, shooting up to half a dozen is a “management cull” but any more is “slaughter”
I have seen glens reforested in the highlands (Fallar, head of river Tilt) with nothing more than a strand of electrified fence set along the top edge so the deer cannot jump over. Outside and in are chalk and cheese. Regen is natural Birch, Hazel, Willow and heather all healthy inside the fence. Powered by small wind powered battery chargers. You state the reason I am most against the cull. As regen improves the feeding it is common sense the deer will be pulled from the surrounding area to the lush growth. So the area becomes a vortex drawing everything in where the centre means death. If area B holds 3000 reduced to 1500 it follows that area A had 3000 but optimum is now zero. However area B is the south flank of A there is another three flanks. All I suppose hold deer. Not SNH so they may still have their 3000. How many will be drawn into the vortex. I was a stalker in Argyll when the migration routes were open. Herds could be seen coming off Rannoch into Argyll through Glen Etive and south onto South Loch Awe. From Bambi Slayer I hear these migrations are no more. The vast numbers coming through Black Mount are a thing of the past. Gradually the deer will become like the roe in central scotland. Vermin. We create new habitats and teh animals adapt to it. Red deer colonised the highlands after the trees were cut down. They adapted to hill life. Now to create pockets of what we destroyed they must be eliminated. Shot and left where they fall. Sorry but I would rather see a herd of deer than scrub woodland. As soon as the first Scots Pine is spotted a sssi will be slapped on the area and public barred anyway unless you hold high military office or have umteen letters after your name. I have yet to see in writing why the regen is a necessity.
Oh and slaughter is not a cull because a cull reduces numbers the "Slaughter" in proposed extermination. Deer not welcome should read deer seen deer dead.
Last edited by jimbo123p; 27-02-2011 at 11:40. Reason: typo