The yes vote

steviemaysa

Active Member
Hi chaps just a quick one, if the Scottish people vote yes on Thursday how will this affect the stalking in Scotland as the fc is government run ?
 
The truth is that no one knows the answer to this or a whole torrent of other questions.
basically the choice is being made without any clear understanding of what the real implications are..
 
The truth is that no one knows the answer to this or a whole torrent of other questions.
basically the choice is being made without any clear understanding of what the real implications are..

Exactly this.

However, you can at least get a sense of the likely direction of policy based on the SNPs explicit ideology with regard to land redistribution, firearms ownership and wildlife management.

Land redistribution: they are keen on finding ways to break up the large estates and limit the amount of land held by single individuals. This has clear implications for the sporting estates and larger farms, with obvious knock on implications for (at the very least) red deer stalking.

Firearms: they have long been committed to devolved firearms legislation anyway, and are very hostile to extensive (or indeed any) private ownership of firearms. Precisely how hostile they are, and how committed to actually removing all private ownership is unclear - though McKaskill himself seems determined to ban all private ownership. This has very clear implications for all shooting sports.

Wildlife management: they appear to favour an American model of wildlife management, where all wildlife is the property of the state (ie. the deer on your land actually belong to the 'Scottish people'). SNH in particular appears entirely committed to this approach, and is explicitly in favour of taking direct control of, at the very least, setting cull targets. However, based on conversations with members of SNH, what they really want is to control every aspect, from population monitoring through setting cull targets to actually conducting the culls (or at least licensing them via tendered tickets for specific numbers of animals). They are vehemently opposed to the current system, both on ideological grounds and on the grounds that it prevents the emergence of coherent, landscape level management plans.

The first two, I think, are rather ambitious, and even with a strong Yes mandate, it will take years for anything really substantial to change - during which time there is every possibility of the SNP being voted out. To put it in perspective, even in Zimbabwe, it took ZANU PF about 20 years to get really serious about land seizure!

The last I think is the most worrying, because there is already considerable traction for changing the way deer are managed at the national level, and it is something that is likely to proceed, in one way or another, even in the event of a No vote. My guess is that, within 10 years or so, we will start to see the emergence of local cull targets set by SNH (ie. they will tell a given estate or farm how many should be taken in that year), and stalkers will have to apply for (and probably buy) a per animal ticket. I'd guess that this will be accompanied by an increase in the qualifications required to actually be allowed to stalk - probably to DSC2 or equivalent, and possibly beyond. Given the importance of visiting stalkers to the rural economy, I doubt this will be prevented, but I'm fairly certain that they will be obliged to always be accompanied by a locally licensed guide (as is the case in, for example, Africa).

My predictions anyway.
 
Last edited:
Independence and SNP rule, are not certain to go hand in hand. Many Scots are for independence, but at the same time aware that the SNP are a bunch of loons. If the YES vote comes tomorrow, I'll be very surprised if an SNP government is in place come independence on 24th March 2016.
 
I get so angry about how governments feel its OK to spend hundreds of thousands if not millions of tax payers money setting up quangos fixing a problem that doesn't exist.

ATB

Chasey
 
Exactly this.

However, you can at least get a sense of the likely direction of policy based on the SNPs explicit ideology with regard to land redistribution, firearms ownership and wildlife management.

Land redistribution: they are keen on finding ways to break up the large estates and limit the amount of land held by single individuals. This has clear implications for the sporting estates and larger farms, with obvious knock on implications for (at the very least) red deer stalking.

Firearms: they have long been committed to devolved firearms legislation anyway, and are very hostile to extensive (or indeed any) private ownership of firearms. Precisely how hostile they are, and how committed to actually removing all private ownership is unclear - though McKaskill himself seems determined to ban all private ownership. This has very clear implications for all shooting sports.

Wildlife management: they appear to favour an American model of wildlife management, where all wildlife is the property of the state (ie. the deer on your land actually belong to the 'Scottish people'). SNH in particular appears entirely committed to this approach, and is explicitly in favour of taking direct control of, at the very least, setting cull targets. However, based on conversations with members of SNH, what they really want is to control every aspect, from population monitoring through setting cull targets to actually conducting the culls (or at least licensing them via tendered tickets for specific numbers of animals). They are vehemently opposed to the current system, both on ideological grounds and on the grounds that it prevents the emergence of coherent, landscape level management plans.

The first two, I think, are rather ambitious, and even with a strong Yes mandate, it will take years for anything really substantial to change - during which time there is every possibility of the SNP being voted out. To put it in perspective, even in Zimbabwe, it took ZANU PF about 20 years to get really serious about land seizure!

The last I think is the most worrying, because there is already considerable traction for changing the way deer are managed at the national level, and it is something that is likely to proceed, in one way or another, even in the event of a No vote. My guess is that, within 10 years or so, we will start to see the emergence of local cull targets set by SNH (ie. they will tell a given estate or farm how many should be taken in that year), and stalkers will have to apply for (and probably buy) a per animal ticket. I'd guess that this will be accompanied by an increase in the qualifications required to actually be allowed to stalk - probably to DSC2 or equivalent, and possibly beyond. Given the importance of visiting stalkers to the rural economy, I doubt this will be prevented, but I'm fairly certain that they will be obliged to always be accompanied by a locally licensed guide (as is the case in, for example, Africa).

My predictions anyway.

You are rather out of date, we are already given our cull targets by SNH, and before that DCS and before that RDC
 
By independence Salmond has every intention of having his policies so far advanced that the first true independently elected government will be tied up in litigation for years. Let's face it, Europe will overturn the majority of SNP pledges as against civil liberties or too bent bananas. Break up estates. Lawyers are already rubbing their hands. Vote with your heads come tomorrow not your hearts. Like Scottish football, passion does not guarantee results. We don't have the players to keep up in the big picture. Our hospitals are already under staffed. Many doctors are foreign. Even Aberdeen cannot attract UK consultants. Our brightest and best will still migrate south and being replaced by Middle East immigrants. Ten years time Cameron will be a distant memory lost in the mist of time. Yes will haunt us for generations to come. Remember, no separation issues of costs have been discussed. Do you honestly believe we can walk away without a share of the burden.
 
You are rather out of date, we are already given our cull targets by SNH, and before that DCS and before that RDC

Not everyone.

I stalk on 2 farms and 1 estate, and none of them are subject to cull targets set by SNH, I assume (though I don't know for sure) because there are no red deer on them.

What I mean is an explicit, binding figure given to all land - both public and private, for all species.
 
Not everyone.

I stalk on 2 farms and 1 estate, and none of them are subject to cull targets set by SNH, I assume (though I don't know for sure) because there are no red deer on them.

What I mean is an explicit, binding figure given to all land - both public and private, for all species.

Sorry I thought you were referring to red deer.
 
If you refer to Clause 31 (b) of the White Paper you will find that in an Independant Scotland, deer will no longer have to take their nationalist fervour out on the trees and will reduce grazing pressure by respectfully limiting the national herd size (through Cervid Self Control) to a total number already passed through Scottish Parliament on the 5th February this year, with full SNH approval.

Of course the Westminster Government have not defined any such position at all on the matter and are spreading fear and lies about deer through a petty smear campaign.
 
Sorry I thought you were referring to red deer.

There are plenty of places/estates which shoot Red deer that have no cull figures imposed on them by SNH or anyone else.

At deer management group level it is discussed between neighbouring estates,however the only culls insisted upon are those in a voluntary cull agreement area i.e section 7.
 
Hi chaps just a quick one, if the Scottish people vote yes on Thursday how will this affect the stalking in Scotland as the fc is government run ?


No worries now but a bet there was a lot of tear's in the porridge this morning. Common sense prevailed. :british: :british: :british: :british:

Jimbo
 
I believe they are calling themselves The 45 now.
Probably a more loaded figure than the actual one of 44.69%.


Private Fraser you should stand as a member of parliament. You did a sterling job putting your argument across. Well done.

Really pleased that we are to remain together. Good news for all those Scots in the forces, including many of my old friends who are still serving.
 
Back
Top