code of practice on deer management

barongcw

Well-Known Member
In other post I saw a mention about the above.

As I never heard of it I Googled the subject and discovered that it is a Scottish set of regulations.

Looking thought it I see no mention at all about deerdogs.

Is there a reason why the use of deerdogs is not mentioned at all in this code?
 
What you going to do about it !! They obviously dont think we need a trained deer dog

I was not planning to do much! It was more curiosity. Somebody up north should ask the powers that be what they plan to do advise people how to recover wounded deer.
 
I was not planning to do much! It was more curiosity. Somebody up north should ask the powers that be what they plan to do advise people how to recover wounded deer.


Read the thing properly... please? .... before your tangled underwear causes you an embarrassment. You wouldn't want the sweet ladies at Great Glen House making you feel like a "silly billy", now would you?

http://www.bestpracticeguides.org.uk/culling_dogs.aspx

There's two pages on "dog use", same amount of space as "shot placement" and twice as much space as devoted to "marksmanship".
 
Read the thing properly... please? .... before your tangled underwear causes you an embarrassment. You wouldn't want the sweet ladies at Great Glen House making you feel like a "silly billy", now would you?

http://www.bestpracticeguides.org.uk/culling_dogs.aspx

There's two pages on "dog use", same amount of space as "shot placement" and twice as much space as devoted to "marksmanship".

Thank you for this, I'll certainly look at it.

But I was referring to the official "Code of Practice on Deer Management" as published by the SNH. In that official document I cannot find anything about deer dogs.
 
Thank you for this, I'll certainly look at it.

But I was referring to the official "Code of Practice on Deer Management" as published by the SNH. In that official document I cannot find anything about deer dogs.

Check page five of said Code (which, incidentally, is really an adjunct to the WANE Act)... there it references you to the Best Practice Guide, just like wot I did.
 
Read the thing properly... please? .... before your tangled underwear causes you an embarrassment. You wouldn't want the sweet ladies at Great Glen House making you feel like a "silly billy", now would you?

http://www.bestpracticeguides.org.uk/culling_dogs.aspx

There's two pages on "dog use", same amount of space as "shot placement" and twice as much space as devoted to "marksmanship".

Yes, I agree with you this note covers deer dogs.

If you happen to know the author please tell him that the word "Torvebeller" does not exist. It should be "Totverbeller".

As for the advice given as to how to follow up a wounded deer. My continental teachers would commit hari kiri if they read it but that is not the subject of this post.
 
Check page five of said Code (which, incidentally, is really an adjunct to the WANE Act)... there it references you to the Best Practice Guide, just like wot I did.

The page 5 I looked at has nothing about deerdogs, probably we are looking at different versions.

And do not forget you are talking to a curious yet puzzled alien. What is the WANE Act?

And in your view should deer dogs pass some kind of officially approved exam before they can call themselves "suitably trained dogs"? A DSC for dogs?
 
Yes, I agree with you this note covers deer dogs.

If you happen to know the author please tell him that the word "Torvebeller" does not exist. It should be "Totverbeller".

As for the advice given as to how to follow up a wounded deer. My continental teachers would commit hari kiri if they read it but that is not the subject of this post.

S'full o' spelling errors.

As for your continental dog training and tracking techniques, they are a thing to marvel at but tell me, if you can, what proportion of trailing is required after bad shots at properly stalked beasts, ie. stalked and shot in stationary condition (a la UK style) as opposed to the number of wounded (badly shot) driven game that need to be tracked?

I'm confident you horror at the lack of dog use and skill here is only surpassed by the horror with which shooting running game is traditionally regarded this side of the Noordzee.
 
The wane Act is

The... Wildlife and Natural Environment Act (Scotland) 2011..... <-------- New Law

The Deer Management Code of which you speak is a brief explanation of this new law as it pertains to the management of deer, or more precisely as it pertains to the responsibilities now imposed on various people by the new law.

The code is fairly brief and relates mainly to that which is new but it also makes the point of informing you of other law and best practice guidance which you must refer to yourself.

I hope this post helps you grasp the situation better.
 
Before we start the Deer Dog assessment war again.

The BP guides were written with deer industry input. A suitably trained deer dog, is one that finds deer [wounded, dead, whatever], it's horses for courses.
The type of dog, training method is irrelevant.

If you have any comments on the guides, let them know. The guides are meant to be a constant work in progress.
 
S'full o' spelling errors.

As for your continental dog training and tracking techniques, they are a thing to marvel at but tell me, if you can, what proportion of trailing is required after bad shots at properly stalked beasts, ie. stalked and shot in stationary condition (a la UK style) as opposed to the number of wounded (badly shot) driven game that need to be tracked?

I'm confident you horror at the lack of dog use and skill here is only surpassed by the horror with which shooting running game is traditionally regarded this side of the Noordzee.

Do not get your question. Do you want to know what % is wounded on driven shoots as compared to stationary?

Your second point is one of the great differences in outlook. I have been to pheasant shoots in Germany where every pheasant shot at was either recovered or declared missed. Sometimes we all waited for 15 minutes or so whilst one picker up went for one specific bird. Yet in the UK I hate to think how many wounded pheasants we leave after a day shooting.

With deer and boar it is different. There the continentals accept wounding in order to complete their quota but substantial efforts are made to track the wounded ones after the shoot is over and the next day.
I myself believe it is better to move does for 2 days with a lot of rifles to shoot the quota rather than chase them about for a couple of months 3 or 4 times a week whilst they are heavily pregnant..
 
Last edited:
Do not get your question. Do you want to know what % is wounded on driven shoots as compared to stationary?

Your second point is one of the great differences in outlook. I have been to pheasant shoots in Germany where every pheasant shot at was either recovered or declared missed. Sometimes we all waited for 15 minutes or so whilst one picker up went for one specific bird. Yet in the UK I hate to think how many wounded pheasants we leave after a day shooting.

With deer and boar it is different. There the continentals accept wounding in order to complete their quota but substantial efforts are made to track the wounded ones after the shoot is over and the next day.
I myself believe it is better to move the does for 2 days with a lot of rifles to shoot the quota rather than chase them about for a couple of months 3 or 4 times a week.

Just so you know... I have the highest regard for the shooting ethics of my European Neighbours and personally I do not have a horror of driven sport.

I was partly teasing you and partly making a valid point for the purposes of your education and understanding. You are correct. There is a difference in outlook and it is often as puzzling to me as I'm sure it is to you. Though, on this topic I could go much further in discussing the dificulty our lawmakers and masters might have if they were to overtly be seen to tacitly accept wounding of animals.

Incidentally, if you wonder why I might do and say things the way that I do I can only offer this explanation. The bland is ignored. The contentious, the offensive and the outrageous as well as the downright challenging are rarely ignored. So, if you want to make a point that people will either "get" or take a decided "side" on, don't be bland.

I think we're on the same wavelength now... yes/no? ;)
 
Bambislayer is correct a trained dog is stated in the BP guides. There is no official test for the dogs they are as stated guides. But that is not to say there should not be a set standard that dogs and owners should pass . The FC have the statement that a trained dog should be used when under contract for them .(but there is no test you can turn up with any dog). SNH state when looking for night licence you need a trained dog but the training is not checked. But for most of us none of our training is checked at the moment so why worry. I will also state these are guides and are works in progress and a wee phone call might complete your knowledge of what is required.
 
I was partly teasing you and partly making a valid point for the purposes of your education and understanding. You are correct. There is a difference in outlook and it is often as puzzling to me as I'm sure it is to you. Though, on this topic I could go much further in discussing the dificulty our lawmakers and masters might have if they were to overtly be seen to tacitly accept wounding of animals.

Incidentally, if you wonder why I might do and say things the way that I do I can only offer this explanation. The bland is ignored. The contentious, the offensive and the outrageous as well as the downright challenging are rarely ignored. So, if you want to make a point that people will either "get" or take a decided "side" on, don't be bland.

I think we're on the same wavelength now... yes/no? ;)


Not certain I agree with your last point. Contentious yes, outrageous may be, challanging definitively but offensive?
 
. A suitably trained deer dog, is one that finds deer [wounded, dead, whatever], it's horses for courses.

The type of dog, training method is irrelevant.

If you have any comments on the guides, let them know. The guides are meant to be a constant work in progress.

I would guess that any dog can find a deer especially when it is put next to his or her foodbowl but should not some kind of independent assessor judge that hound to see if he/she is good enough to alleviate suffering?
 
Last edited:
Bambislayer is correct a trained dog is stated in the BP guides. There is no official test for the dogs they are as stated guides. But that is not to say there should not be a set standard that dogs and owners should pass . The FC have the statement that a trained dog should be used when under contract for them .(but there is no test you can turn up with any dog). SNH state when looking for night licence you need a trained dog but the training is not checked. But for most of us none of our training is checked at the moment so why worry. I will also state these are guides and are works in progress and a wee phone call might complete your knowledge of what is required.

It might be quite amusing to get a member of your parliament to ask a question or two to the FC and the SNH.
 
Before we start the Deer Dog assessment war again.

The BP guides were written with deer industry input. A suitably trained deer dog, is one that finds deer [wounded, dead, whatever], it's horses for courses.

Ah but I read in the best practise guide:

Calm, confident and obedient in the presence of deer, game and livestock; Steady to the sound of rifle fire and to be relied upon to ‘stay’ at a specific point for extended periods;
Capable of tracking a shot/injured deer and communicating its presence at the end of a track;
Capable of securing — either physically or ‘at bay’ — the species of deer stalked

Now I wonder how many deer dogs presently used by stalkers can do that. 5%? I doubt it.
 
Not certain I agree with your last point. Contentious yes, outrageous may be, challanging definitively but offensive?

Ah! In the great British tradition of free speech sensibilities MUST be offended. Lampooning of the sensibilty is a rite of passage which only true sentiments can endure. It's a wheat from chaff thing. :D
 
Back
Top