The Future of the "Old Victorian Style Stalking Estates"

Tulloch

Well-Known Member
Over this period, like many people, I have had a chance to reflect and think about the future of the shooting industry as a whole but mainly to do with Stalking and the differences in the way it is managed through modern changes within the industry, and, for the most part how much relevance the Old Victorian Style Estate Stalking has in the future.

The Romanticism of the Victorian Estates has been the forefront of the Stalking industry for a very long time, in fact, many stalkers still perceive the practices and the customs held within those ideals as being what stalking is all about. The idyllic atmosphere of the "Victorian Highland Estate" of long open hill and catered for days in the most secluded parts of the UK by experienced estate stalkers and a team of ghillies is the aspiration of many a hunter. Hunting that majestic Red and picking just the right beast is still today in many a stalkers dreams. It has always been the fact, along with African big game, as a must do for every "hunter" to experience that hospitality for themselves and undoubtedly it is also where "Hunting Tourism" originally started. For almost 200 years Scotland has been a prime location for the hunting world and to bag that majestic "Royal" that "Monarch of the Glen" will probably always attract some level of interest.

It is now 2020, we are sitting in the middle of an international pandemic crisis over Covid-19, stalking at the most part is non existent at this moment in time due to travel restrictions and for us in the Highlands it is strange to see barely a tourist on the road let alone anything in regards to hunting tourism. So while this crisis is upon us it is a time to reflect on how our industry is run. Over this period I have been told many times, by those involved, of Estate workers, from keepers to cleaners, being paid off and losing their jobs. This has showed a heavy lack of loyalty from estate owners towards people who essentially work tirelessly to keep their assets working on a daily basis in their absence. So this article is a projection of MY OPINION on what the future holds for the traditional Highland estate.

Estates in general are usually not the main business of their owner, yes, they are run as businesses but in many circumstances they are run as subsidiary businesses from their main income, but, that does not mean that estates run themselves. The average Estate still has Factors/Estate Managers, Gamekeepers/ Stalkers, Grounds Keepers/Maintenance, Cleaners, Cooks etc etc. so they are not small operations within themselves and for the most part have to earn its own income, although, subsidised by the main income interests of the owner/s many estates, like any other business, also rely on other factors to keep running, part from the initial investments by the owners they also require other forms of income to keep their estates running which could come in the form of Holiday Lets , Tourism, government grants and of course the main topic of this article , Stalking and Fishing. Over this period, again like most other businesses, estate owners have had to rethink how they run their own assets and in return work out how to make the most out of what they have, hence why the massive loss of estate jobs. This leads to question how a restructure of these estates will look and in return the services these estates provide as well as the type of staff they would need to employ.

Over the years there has been a clear increase in the amount of people interested in fields sports, shooting in general has became the largest part of this market. With this increase we have seen a huge increase in independent sporting and shooting businesses offering the same services that traditional estates offer but at half or even quarter the price an estate has to charge. The estates are feeling this change, the pressures on estates are immense, financially for many estates their outgoings are far more than their income as a stand alone business. Because of this estates are also having to adapt and instead of employing people to do certain jobs themselves they are now leasing out their facilities to third parties, using this method they are increasing their returns and in return removing some of their own pressures on their own finances and responsibilities. Do not get me wrong there is very little government backing for sporting estates and increased taxes like the sporting tax has added pressure on the estates to restructure their business models.

So how does this look for the future for stalking?

In my opinion, bare in mind this is my opinion only, I can see the days of the Estate Stalker or Gamekeeper being a thing of the past, in many regards it already has with gamekeepers becoming more self employed or part time as well as taking other roles on away from their gamekeeping duties. For some estate owners to guarantee a salary of £26k per annum plus house plus vehicles and clothing etc , just for one member of staff, is becoming very difficult to justify, then the maintenance of buildings and grounds as well as sporting taxes and other legal and political responsibilities and obligations make their current business model seem not worth it. Due to this I see estates using third parties to make money from their current assets. Lets take sporting for example. an estate can lease out their sporting rights to an individual third party company, with this they can maximise a steady income from a guaranteed yearly lease (whether sporting is happening or not due to seasonal restrictions) as well as remove other taxes and responsibilities that are now moved on to that third party company they have leased the rights too, such as sporting tax and cull obligations etc.
They also do not need to provide a house or vehicles or clothing etc to an employee but instead LET out the property or properties they would usually retain for employees, these properties then can contribute either monthly or weekly income depending how they would like to market their Lets. This business model to an estate maximises financial return of assets that they would normally lose money on also with this model you can focus reinvestment into estate infrastructure and development. Easy now to see where I am going with this.

What this means for stalking though is that you will be less likely to receive the same hospitality as you would have had from an estate run day, staff numbers maybe less or the level of hospitality will again be dependent on another party providing it, such as a hotel etc. To be honest though, in regards to accommodation many stalkers prefer to find their own accommodation that suits their own budgets. Part of the package an estate offers is the expertise of an on site guide/stalker, I do not see this changing as even the third party deer management company can offer that level of expertise. What I do see and already have seen is an increase in unaccompanied and syndicate stalking being available offering a more flexible service than an estate can offer, whether this is a good thing or a bad thing is up to the individual to decide. One of the benefits I do see for the individual stalker is that what was less affordable before may be now open to the average person, estate stalking is still very much an exclusive experience and un-reachable for many on an average income so this change might shorten the gap.

I am not advocating that this change is good or bad for the industry, a lot of parts to the shooting industry relies on stalking and the sports to happen to thrive. Opening up stalking though will increase the retail sector of the market which will mean shops, gunmakers and clothing manufacturers may see added revenue in the industry and there will be a change on how the landscape looks in regards to outdoor pursuits.

In conclusion the market is changing, Covid-19 or not it has been changing for a while, Traditional Victorian Estates are having to adapt to current climates, although interest in shooting has increased the political climate over hunting in general has never been more volatile and estate owners have seen this. The Highlands still attracts millions of tourists a year and over the last ten years many estates have adapted into offering weekly let accommodation and building chalet parks etc. I see fishing pursuits increasing to add to the idyllic marketing of those holiday Lets but I see stalking and shooting being put aside as a priority for these estates. What hospitality that was once reserved for the rich who wanted to stalk a Royal will be expanded to open up those exclusive estates to families to enjoy the outdoors, with the increase of revenue from tourism we will see an increase of hill paths and cycle route offering better infrastructure for families to enjoy. Some Estates already offer this with chalet parks, quad biking experiences and outdoor adventure programs. The prestige of being the "Game Keeper" of such and such estate maybe a thing of the past very soon which in that respect will be a great loss to country life. Opening country life to everyone is big business and this has not gone amiss to landowners and with many already having facilities available it is not a huge financial change, but, it will be a big change on how the landscape of country living may look in the Highlands. This change has happened from time to time throughout history though, once upon a time whole villages in the Highlands were dedicated to the accommodation of the workers of those estates now it is not, for example look at Tomich village where I come from was once only inhabited by estate workers for Guisachan.

The debate will go on and the old timers will reminisce, but, change in inevitable.
 
A very thought provoking piece Tulloch.... and one I completely concur with from my own brief experiences and observations. Even in the last ten years in Sutherland, there has been a steady change in ownership of the estates, keepers and staff reduced and the new, often incredibly wealthy, owners who have not got the same historical feel for the estates, but have the financial wherewithal to do as they like. I realised years ago that Estates seldom make real money as the income from stalking and a short fishing season is quickly swallowed up in outgoings and staff costs. I think the various political parties think all estates are "wealthy" due to the advertised sale prices without understanding that this is the only time that the owner will ever see any real return on their investment. I presume this is why there is so much more emphasis on woodland creation and letting cottages/lodges - both of which will give a more reliable return. Change is happening and will continue, but it will be a sad day when the estates are run purely as a financial enterprise and all handled through various land agents.....
 
I think the biggest change will be at the hands of the Scottish Government have a look at the latest recommendations
even if only some of them become law there will be huge differences to stalking in Scotland.

Try to get your hands on a copy of the 200 Deer Working Group recommendations .
Mind you you will need a bit of time on your hands as its over 370 pages long.
 
Last edited:
Many thanks for this, and I think it contains much truth. From your closing lines I realise I am now also one of the old timers :-|

It also brings to mind the old saying "How do you end up with a small fortune? Start with a large fortune and buy a Scottish sporting estate!"

If I look at the estate I stalked on for over 20 years, it has gone exactly the way you describe - there used to be a resident stalker and his wife who looked after the guests in the lodge, but now they've gone, the stalking is let to an external agent and the lodge can be hired independently of any sporting activities. The stalker knew the land in the intimate way that only someone who lives and works on the ground can. He knew not just the deer, but all the flora and fauna, with an encyclopaedic knowledge of the estate.

Also a huge part of the pleasure from staying there came from things totally unrelated to stalking - seeing the mist roll back from the river as the sun rose, hearing stags roaring around the lodge, going outside to see the Northern Lights and a Moonbow.

Now all that is gone, with the stalker and rifles travelling up each day by Argo or Land Rover, shooting a stag, and then driving away.

Progress perhaps, but staying there now would be a completely different - and to my mind far lesser - experience.
 
That is a very well thought out and informative piece of writing Tulloch. Thank you for posting. As someone who has never been to Scotland on any stalking expeditions, the stereotype is that such a venture is expensive and out of the realms of all but the wealthy and privileged.
While the changes that are taking place might make it more affordable for folk like me, it is a pity that it comes at the expense of the estate staff and traditional roles.
 
I think the biggest change will be at the hands of the Scottish Government have a look at the latest recommendations
even if only some of them become law there will be huge differences to stalking in Scotland.

Try to get your hands on a copy of the 200 Deer Working Group recommendations .
Mind you you will need a bit of time on your hands as its over 370 pages long.

I agree, "Laird bashing" is top of their agenda. I haven't seen the detail but understand that Nicola has excluded shooting, stalking and some other forms of employment linked to estates, from the various government backed schemes designed to protect jobs that might be made redundant due to COVID.
 
There is one thing I have tried to make clear , This change is not just caused by one political agenda or party for that matter , the changes happened before and those changes are happening again.

In the past an Estate was a self sufficient entity of its own . Lets look at your country villages and the house names in them , "The old mill", "The Kennels" , "*** Lodge" , "Hotels" ,, "The post house", "Keepers cottage" and so on and so on , each estate had its own baker, butcher, keeper etc etc and that changed very quickly as commercialism changed. The same happened with fuel garages in the 80's and 90's many village ones are now gone because its just as easy to drive to local hubs and super markets. Traditional estates are the first to change when there is infrastructure change and yes political climates don't help but when there is more money in wind farms than what their is in grouse moor management then its about money not country living.

JUST TO ADD this is not just happening in Scotland it is happening below the border too I just have very little experience in dealing with estates in England but I see it being no different but probably more bird orientated than Deer
 
I would say the change started in the late 80s. I remember the guests that used to be Sir or the Rt hon, Capt or Lord whoever, who enjoyed the traditions and treated you as an equal, began to change to ‘new’ money. They were more interested in the number of kills/tines and treated you as a servant. Those new guests then went on to buy estates if they could.
But then, it was always better in the past !
 
I agree, "Laird bashing" is top of their agenda. I haven't seen the detail but understand that Nicola has excluded shooting, stalking and some other forms of employment linked to estates, from the various government backed schemes designed to protect jobs that might be made redundant due to COVID.

Although not particularly conspiratorial generally I can't help thinking that there is a huge element of truth in your opening line.

From the continued push on open-cage salmon farming despite clear evidence that it is akin to Nuclear War on nature...

To the Werrity Report which seemed to start from the premise that Gamekeepers kill BoP...

To the DWG Report released in December which effectively demonises Deer...

They all, universally, negatively impact Wild Salmon fishing / Grouse Shooting / Stalking. Traditionally the main income streams for highland estates

Kill the income streams and you kill the Estate. The fact that native flora and fauna are the unwitting collateral damage in the war of attrition against landowners is entirely irrelevant to the SNP.

If the clowns at Wild Justice ever pull their "impact of pheasant and partridge release" stunt with SNH as they did with DEFRA I would almost be willing to stake money that the resultant ScotGov report would effectively back them up as it could then be used as another hammer against Estates.


Their pathological hatred of Landowners I can stomach, but destroying the fauna of Scotland as a means to an end is abhorrent.
 
Owning and running a sporting estate is a hell of a lot cheaper than, say, running a large luxury yacht and sales of those are apparently increasing, as is the number of millionaires and billionaires globally. So there are plenty of potential owners who could afford to run them. The advantage of a yacht though is far, far less interference from do-gooders and governments...

Too many people wanting to tell others what to do all the time rather than minding their own business is the problem...
 
Owning and running a sporting estate is a hell of a lot cheaper than, say, running a large luxury yacht and sales of those are apparently increasing, as is the number of millionaires and billionaires globally. So there are plenty of potential owners who could afford to run them. The advantage of a yacht though is far, far less interference from do-gooders and governments...

Too many people wanting to tell others what to do all the time rather than minding their own business is the problem...
Not so sure on that, mate of mine runs a super yacht management company in Monaco, the cheapest one on his books to hire is £90 grand a week, not including food or fuel, lots of owners do this to pay for the upkeep and just use it themselves a few weeks of the year.
 
Not so sure on that, mate of mine runs a super yacht management company in Monaco, the cheapest one on his books to hire is £90 grand a week, not including food or fuel, lots of owners do this to pay for the upkeep and just use it themselves a few weeks of the year.
Ok, clearly there are some lucrative ways to recover costs or even make money with yachts. But my point is there are lots of people who can afford to run these estates but aren’t interested because of all the extra hassle.

Just look at the Independence referendum - there was lots of discussion about grouse moors with agents reporting that no buyer would consider a grouse moor in Scotland but were still happy to invest in England.

My point is not about the rights or wrongs of independence - but about the reaction to perceived or actual political interference which is putting people off and stifling investment in these estates
 
The investment value of the asset is reason alone for many to continue with the traditional model of management, these sportings are what tend to interest those wealthy enough to buy their own corner of Scotland, a thing which is in precious short supply, in a Global marketplace that has been, and doubtless will continue to be bouyant.

Much of the changes of management come about when entities which can scarcely afford to invest the sums required to continue to run the estate on a more or less traditional manner try to hang on, when their better option was in fact to sell to the next widget magnate or dot com billionaire, who is prepared to spend the necessary to maintain and enhance the value of the asset. The places and the wealthy folk still exist, and no political party in the U.K. is advocating expropriation of legally owned land and assets; sure the small-minded policies of the Nationalistas do not endear themselves to struggling Lairds, but to those taking the longer view they represent small irritation overall. What tends to happen is that the better estates become more rather than less exclusive, as if you owned it yourself and were a passionate sportsman, why would you spend lavishly on the running of then place only then to offer the cream of the crop of the place for a relative trifle to a stranger?

For sure also, there are ways to generate meaningful income, such as wind- and hydro- electric schemes, which the Nats are all in favour of, which require money, land and water to be harnessed; these are useful income streams to bold and solvent owners, but often out of reach of eg third or fourth generation but comparatively impoverished owning interests, often people who do not share the passion for the hill that the original creator of the forest him- or herself possessed.

To enjoy a week-long or a season rental and stay in the lodge on a traditionally run highland sporting estate with all the facilities at your disposal will always be a most memorable experience; alas, it will never be readily as readily affordable as a day trip up some hill with a guide (as opposed to a full time hill Man) to shoot a single stag of indeterminate stature, but then to compare or conflate one with the other is somewhat missing much of what it is about.

There is plenty of demand still for top drawer places, in spite of the somewhat cloudy sky suggested, it may be worth considering which is the better route for the Country as a whole (in terms of inward investment in the local infrastructure, local businesses and service providers, versus selling off the assets available piecemeal).

No one answer is right or wrong, as different places have different Lairds, with different ideas and visions.
 
Last edited:
@Freeforester the main thrust of my (only half tongue-in-cheek) conspiracy theory was to highlight that if those sporting interests are destroyed then there is nothing left to interest those who have the money to invest and nurture Sporting Estates. Which self respecting billionaire is going to buy a few thousand acres of barren hillside to build a windfarm or hydroscheme? The only option then for an impoverished owner looking to cut his losses? The other great ScotGov magic-wand. Community buyout.

The following is an excerpt from a debate in the Scottish Parliament spoken by Roseanna Cunningham on the 21st March 2019:

"That the Parliament agrees that land is one of Scotland’s most important assets; recognises the value of the Scottish Land Rights and Responsibilities Statement in providing a framework for land decisions and land management in Scotland; recognises the close relationship between land ownership and land use; agrees that community ownership of land should be the norm and not simply a response to market failure or disputes with landowners; recognises the importance of the Scottish Land Fund in supporting community land and asset buyouts; recognises that the work of the Scottish Land Commission is making a positive contribution to delivering the Scottish Government’s land reform agenda, and agrees the importance of ensuring that land reform continues to be a key policy priority to change the entrenched and inequitable pattern of land ownership in Scotland so that everyone can benefit from land."

I think that it sums up the position of ScotGov rather neatly. It is not the Lairds that they hate, it is private ownership of land.
 
Back
Top