Deer Stalking on NTS land

LuckyEddie

Well-Known Member
Just for peoples info I'm a member of the NTS and totally hacked off that they are using contract stalkers to carry out the cull at Mar Lodge.

I sent an email suggesting that they use volutneers stalkers based on the principle that to get stalking they must be NTS memebers.
This would serve two functions, i) to bring costs down by not having to pay contract stalkers and ii) actually increase revenue by incrreasing membership.

That's the basics - the fine details are up for discussion but it's a suggestion and I'll keep folks posted if I hear anything back (not holding my breath).

Ed
 
Eddie it might be a nice try but then you need to see were alot of the money comes from for the trust it comes from SNH /FC/FE etc and then you might know why the stalkers come from the contract area. They are then under the direct control of the governemt through a government department. But hey its worth a try certainly to use local stalks even if contractors would cut down the carbon foot print keep employment local etc etc
 
As widow said there is nothing new here they have been using contractors for several years now and with great affect if you want to reduce the deer numbers.The contractors are only used for part of the overall cull and must help relieve presure on the fulltime stalkers.As for the contractors being controlled by the goverment don,t believe all the storys you hear as these contractors work closely with the stalking team and are guided by these guys to help them reach there objectives. As a member of the NTS you must believe in what they are trying to achieve and i can assure you useing contractors is they most cost effective and safe way to achieve it.
 
COST EFFECTIVE MY A*SE
for the price they paid the contractors at Mar for 2 weeks would of paid another stalker to be on the ground for a whole year and then some.Take into account all the times they were called up there and put all the monies in a pot and then see how many full time stalkers could of been employed !!!!!

Its these big government agencies that tend to spend the tax payers cash an endless pot of money and no one to be accountable to
 
Mick b I think you have been told some porckys about how much contractors get paid .


Regardless of how much contractors get paid, errecting a fence at the beginning of this project would have saved hundred if not a few thousand deer there lives.... Not to mention the public purse thousands pounds!
 
Read the attached article from the Shooting Times (4/12/10) - £750,000 of tax payers money (yours and mine) for 12,000 deer dead and it's failed!
Hence keep the money and use it for other more useful issues but encourage membership and stalking thereby increasing revenue instead of spending our hard earned money. Is my point any clearer? As I said there rough point is there although it needs smoothing and more detail.

A controversial project to restore Caledonian pine forest at Mar Lodge estate has failed despite culling 12,000 red deer
The National Trust for Scotland has admitted to the Scottish Gamekeepers Association (SGA) that its controversial project to restore the Caledonian pine forest on Mar Lodge estate, in Deeside, has not been successful.

In a telephone interview conducted in October, the National Trust for Scotland’s Alexander Bennett admitted to the SGA that after spending an estimated £750,000 in funding from Scottish Natural Heritage and culling more than 12,000 red deer, the project has produced virtually no new trees. He also said the National Trust for Scotland’s idea to restore the forest without input from professional stalkers, the use of deer fences or heather management was flawed.

The admission comes after the Deer Commission for Scotland said at a public meeting in Braemar in June that it also believed the 15-year project had failed. The SGA has now called for a public inquiry. Spokesman George MacDonald said: “The project was a total waste of taxpayers’ money. What steps are being taken to ensure that this flawed management plan, which was condemned as unworkable right at the beginning, will not be attempted again? The National Trust for Scotland should now be forced to pay compensation to neighbouring land holdings for their loss of sporting revenue over the years.”
 
I think the letter you have added only makes it clearer that no more stalking or very liitle should be done now as they have wiped out such a large proportion of the herd already. Fencing is the answer there not more deer in the larder, whoever is shooting them.

Fot future deer control on NTS properties in a managed and ballanced way then yes I can see your point. But not now at Mar Lodge estate.
 
Salmo, you could be right there but the NTS wanted it to remain natural and i suppose a large fence in such a scenic area would spoil the view. You could argue people go up there to see the wildlife as well but whats done is done you can only shoot them once.
 
Having seen fences in other parts of the country and found them in no way diminishing my view I think for them to use that as an argument to justify what they have done there is a poor defence.
But as you say dead is dead.
 
Lucky eddie, At the SGA meeting you are talking about was it mentioned that one of the largest neighbours to Mar Lodge are wiping out there deer so they can shoot more grouse i think many people at that meeting may be hypocritical.
 
Sorry just coming in at the end.Marr Lodge was a disaster p/r wise when the media printed pictures of helicopters lifting carcases of the hill.The NTS have to be very carefull with any future culls.
 
Granted there have been problems before but as I said as an NTS member I'm ticked off that all this money has been spent and recieved nothing but bad press and not achieved the desired effect.
It's about time that the Trust looked at a different approach. I pressume that the deer still need to be controlled and if so why not "think outside the box".
Also why does everyone like to point out the negative side of things and leave it at that?
Surely as I'm trying to encourage an official body to look at using non contractual stalkers people using this site would be wanting a positive result.
Or am I being naive?
 
Derry i think the chaps that want to remove Deer for grouse have a choice and it is there choice. NTS uses lots of tax payers money there is a differnce a very big difference. I think you are looking at this from a one sided perspective mate and thats never good on an open forum made up of mostly hard working Tax payer going through a recession. ;)
 
Last edited:
If sympathetic fencing was carried out at the begining of any regenaration project and deer removed from these areas, 20 years is the expected working life of a well made
fence, it`s also about the same time as young trees are quite able to look after themselves and hand a bit of browsing and rubbing, remove the fences hay presto, a semi natural wood land laid out before you, put up a new fence on a new area close to the regenarated woodland and so it continues until you acheive your woodland objective!

Trouble is people in high management positions, land objectives and policies don`t last as long as our woodlands, they require quick results to make a name for themselves

This is just my humble take on this issue I dont believe its rocket science, it just takes time and a little foward planning!
 
Last edited:
Sorry should of said in last post, the fenced off areas could then be leased simmilar to FC ground! Maybe.
 
Again I am at the tail end of things.I work as a contractor fot the NTS (not stalking) and it is departmental,from outside looking in you think you can resolve the problem with an olive branch.It does not work that way.
 
The Ghillie, Spot on!! Properly planted naturaly occuring species that are thined by natural sourses or by mans hand, in the fenced situation, is Definetly the way to go!. It is nessesary to fence and regenerate a large acerage to begin to return the natural Caladonian type situation, you need a bigish area to get the full spectrum of naturaly occuring species, and as you say it is most definitly a long term vision and not a throw money at it quick fix.

ATB Barry
 
If sympathetic fencing was carried out at the begining of any regenaration project and deer removed from these areas, 20 years is the expected working life of a well made
fence, it`s also about the same time as young trees are quite able to look after themselves and hand a bit of browsing and rubbing, remove the fences hay presto, a semi natural wood land laid out before you, put up a new fence on a new area close to the regenarated woodland and so it continues until you acheive your woodland objective!

Trouble is people in high management positions, land objectives and policies don`t last as long as our woodlands, they require quick results to make a name for themselves

This is just my humble take on this issue I dont believe its rocket science, it just takes time and a little foward planning!

Now you're talking.....resign from your job immediately and become a forester.

Actually I reckon the fence, establish,fence another bit, establish etc etc approach is the way all landowners should go. It's an efficient and relatively pain free way of establishing good cover without ruining the sporting potential of an estate.
 
Ah thanks guys:D

There is a lot of topics being talked about on this thread,
Contract stalkers are no different to anyone else they are doing a job of work as widows son has rightly said they will have a ton of stuff to pay for,quad,argo, trailers 4x4
Insurance they also got families and morgages to pay for like the rest of us! they commit to getting the job done, their insentive? you guessed it the same as everyone else
money!! To get volanteers to get the job done is not really going to happen!
The volanteer does not have to worry if his cull target is not met in the weekend he has free as he could just go back to his paid job and come back another day and try again all the while deer do what deer do!
So my conclution is give the lads that are trying to put right the deer/haditat balance a break:cool:

Also going back to the fencing issue, if you fence off large areas of commonly used areas by deer you still require to remove these deer within the new area, but now you have reduced the avalaible wintering ground therefore increasing the deer density, so a compensatery cull will need to be concidered, But each area is taken on its own merits!

I once worked with a very foward thinking factor, he was asked to plan a new woodland on a very highly regarded sporting estate. being that this new wood was going to be very large it was likely going to interfere with the stalkers and I dont mind saying that the factor was getting a very hard time from both sides.
His solution was to look at the estate cull records as to the location of all the shot deer in a 15 year period he then gathered this data and found that there were large blocks of ground on the estate that were not stalked or productive and had good acsess, so he fenced and planted up these blocks with native conifers and broadleaves
in a very sutle way with lots of open areas and glades plenty of room around the burns! That was ten years ago the place looks firkin fabulous now:D
THe point is there was little need to cull any more deer with a little forthough
 
Back
Top