High Seat and Foot Stalking Coverage

[Deermanagement]

Looking for a consensus for woodland stalking, high seat as apposed to foot stalking. What area does individual high seats in your woodland cover on average. And secondly, what would be the average area of woodland you would cover, whist stalking on foot in the same woodland?

Assume winter stalking in deciduous woodland, a mixture of coppice, rides, clear fell etc. Just a guess.....

As an example, I have a piece of woodland with each individual high seat, covering maybe 0.75 acres on average whilst if the woodland was stalked on foot, a typical area covered would be around 25 acres on a typical outing. So for this particular woodland, a high seat outing would cover less than 0.5% of the block whilst stalking on foot would cover 14%

Just interested in the typical percentage coverage figures and not success figures.

 

[Deermanagement]

Anyone?.... could do with some estimates in the next couple of days

 

[VSS]

If your highseats are well placed then they may prove far more productive than stalking 25 acres on foot. 25 acres is a very small area of woodland and if you bump one deer you'll more than likely bump them all. A highseat that overlooks a popular spot, such as where deer enter and leave the wood doesn't need to cover a very big area to be productive.
I have one seat that has a view between the trees of only 50 yards straight out in front, and through another line of trees of about 50 yards to one side. These aren't rides, just narrow sightlines through the trees of maybe a couple of metres wide. Two well-used deer paths pass the seat, and it has been much more productive than stalking the same area of woodland on foot.

 

[Andy seatrout]

I’d concur with the post above…..I have a view but I’m a newby to deer stalking ( don’t shoot me down) but not fox shooting….. it seems similar - when I’m out shooting foxes on foot I see plenty, shoot a few but maybe 2 out of 3 are forewarned ( sight, smell, noise) unless it’s really dark and a bit windy ( in which case I have a distinct advantage covering the ground)….. in my high seats - I have two for foxes on my pheasant shoot, if I see a fox I shoot it, so both are chosen overlooking ‘likely’ places…. I see less foxes but more are shot this way….

With the limited stalking I have done, similar seems true, stalking sika we saw lots but they were mostly on alert - in three days we shot two stags, but both from high seats. We saw three times as many walking/stalking….but only one chance of a shot… not taken.

Fallow over the last year much the same, lots of deer in shootable positions from high seats ( just mostly the wrong sex for season) but lots more seen stalking out painfully slowly, only one shot this way….but lots seem ‘bumped’ and bumping into the next group- a domino effect ( but very exciting still).

And yes I do know how to stalk with minimal noise, the first fox I shot with my .223 was a fox at thirty yards stalked in daylight ( all those days stalking rabbits with the HW77 and 95 stood me in good stead).

My arse gets cramp sat in a high seat for more than two hours, so my ideal would be not ‘either or’ but do both stalking into the high seat and stalk back out again….. put out as many high seats as are likely areas…. In a typical wood ( referring my main pheasant wood which is about fifty acres and a mix of conifer and deciduous) I’d struggle to think of viable locations for more than five or six high seats….

 

[Deermanagement]

Just looking for the average area covered by a typical high seat in woodland and how much of the same woodland you would cover on foot. Which is better or more effective is not important to me.

 

[75]

Just looking for the average area covered by a typical high seat in woodland and how much of the same woodland you would cover on foot. Which is better or more effective is not important to me.

Sorry, I've read your original post a few times over the last few days and I still can't understand what you're getting at or, more to the point, why it's important.

It's a case of "horses for courses" and entirely dependent on the type of woodland, area in which you stalk etc. Just because my seats cover, say, 50% of a wood, doesn't mean that will have any relevance on your ground. Percentage of wood covered in an outing is of no interest to me - percentage of deer covered is much more important. No point stalking dead ground if the deer are only in one small area.

But if I took an outing with a guide and only covered 25 acres of woodland in an outing on foot, I'd be very disappointed! That is a small area of wood and, depending on terrain, you could cover it quite quickly. Last outing I took a few weeks back I covered approx 10 times that (mixed, mature woodland) and shot 3 deer.

Anyway, a couple of examples of my seats:
Seat 1. Covers one ride c.0.5 acres. Wood is 10 acres but area I could stalk on foot is zero. It's all overgrown rhododendrons and you can't walk through it but the deer love it. Seat covers 5%, stalking on foot covers 0%
Seat 2. Covers 10 acres of open woodland. Total area of woodland is 19 acres, but there's no point stalking the other 9 acres on foot as it's all dense willow, hazel and birch saplings so impossible to move through or get clear shot on anything. Seat covers 50%, stalking on foot covers the same 50% (but isn't as effective or safe as seat).
Seat 3. Large, mature woodland that gives view of c.20 acres of woodland, but the wood itself is about 400 acres and I could stalk the whole lot. Seat covers 5%, on foot covers 100%.

 

[Deermanagement]

Maybe the question is not as straightforward as I thought. It is relevant to me as to what the average area a woodland high seats covers and likewise, what area of woodland is covered on a average foot stalk. Seem a fairly simple question.

I have stalked area of conifer woodland where I may have properly covered say 100 acres, whilst sitting in a high seat I would have covered something like 1 to 2 acres. Other woodland as you say, is not possible to stalk on foot properly, but if enough views were taken I'd get an average.

The woodland I'm looking to get a comparison, covering 25 acres (that's observing 25 acres even though I'd walk further) of a 180 acre block, I can virtually guarantee to shoot deer. If I wanted to shoot both roe and sika during winter, an outing like this would usually give me at least 5 opportunities. If I'm only after sika, usually 2 or 3 opportunities to take deer.

On the other hand, if I decided to sit in any one of the high seats available for the same period of time, I suspect on average 1 or 2 opportunities. In essence, stalking of foot. I will see considerably more deer, have many more opportunities, whilst also giving me a much better idea of how many, and which parts of the woodland are favourite and any particular time.

Yes I shoot deer from high seats, but I've always been happier actually stalking. Currently I shoot maybe 75% stalking and 25% from a seat, but in the past, it has been a higher percentage on foot.

Maybe as I get older, it'll be more from a seat. I have a couple of clients out in a month or so that are around 75 yrs old and I suspect we will shoot more from a seat than on foot.

So to re-cap, it is only the area, an average woodland high seat covers, and the average amount of woodland covered on foot during an outing.

 

[Andy seatrout]

Well taking into account that further info it’s clear that stalking on foot you’ll cover far more ground. If the woodland is easier to stalk ( nice and open not too much undergrowth - not a thicket) then you’ll see more deer and if they’re not aware get more opportunities to shoot.

On the fallow permission I have you see far more stalking than sitting, so I’d say that in two hours sitting covering the same single acre you’d probably cover ten times that stalking slowly in two hours ( though it’s not a true comparison as the deer may come to you when you’re sat still up in a seat emitting little scent or noise).

Sika in a conifer block- very difficult to stalk….. maybe the amount covered stalking would still be less productive than sitting up?

 

[Heym SR20]

It really depends.

Terrain - is your ground flat or hilly. If its flat highseats are probably safer if not more productive. Hilly ground - many more pockets etc that hide deer so you need to move.

Vegetation, Crop cover etc - thicker, denser, noisier - sitting is probably more productive

Weather, Climate etc - if its very still, sitting may work better, windy - stalking may be better

Time of day - stalking in day, sitting at first or last light.

Type of highseat and comfort. To be effective sitting - you need to be at least an hour if not several before everything settles down and becomes used to your precence. And you need to develop a zen like ability to sit still and to not constantly need another coffee etc etc. A decent comfortable and safe feeling highseat makes a huge difference, a school chair on two poles leant against a tree is just scary.

Clothing - sitting still requires warmth. A good sleeping bag, anzitzsac etc, even in summer makes a huge difference

Your stalking ability. Some can stalk and move quietly. Others cannot and have all the subtlety of a bull dozer. Play to your strengths.

Insects and Midges. If you have a nice and high high seat you can get up and out of the midges. This makes a huge difference. But then you squeeze the trigger, get all excited and go and start gralloching and then ……

And state of mind. Stalking requires lots of concentration, highseat requires calm and relaxation. If you brain is full of crap stalking can be intensely frustrating as the crap resurfaces and then you bump a doe. Whereas as just sitting and being on the verge of sleep can be very good at sorting all the crap. And every few moments you look out. You never actually see a deer or a pig come into the glade - it is suddenly there in the middle, it’s peaceful and quiet and yes its a shame to spoil it, so you go back to your slumber.

So in summary - it utterly depends

 

[GeorgeC]

Too many factors to consider really. One to really consider is prevailing wind direction, it's easy to have a seat in a position that sees lots but useless if they can smell you a lot of the time.

In real terms, you will probably need a number of seats to deal with a number of scenarios and covering the area(s)

 

[25 Sharps]

I’d concur with the post above…..I have a view but I’m a newby to deer stalking ( don’t shoot me down) but not fox shooting….. it seems similar - when I’m out shooting foxes on foot I see plenty, shoot a few but maybe 2 out of 3 are forewarned ( sight, smell, noise) unless it’s really dark and a bit windy ( in which case I have a distinct advantage covering the ground)

I’m guessing you don’t use thermal and NV?

I think it depends on the ground. If the under storey is thick and you are unlikely to be able to see through it to shoot or shoot safely then a high seat in a busy spot is more productive. If the woodland is fairly open like a lot of beech woodland is, then moving around and using a thermal can be more productive.

Agree with the comment above, in a small woodland moving around is pointless as you are likely to just clear the wood, a seat (or somewhere to stand and wait) will be more productive.

 

[Heym SR20]

Couple of other thoughts

As our countryside gets more busy, highseats may well become the preferred option. You can site them on woodland edges, along rides and glades. Places where deer want to be and away from the public. You have certainty that you are shooting down into the ground, and you know where safe shots are and are not. You also plenty of time to know if there is a canoodling couple in the long grass.

Get into the highseat, get comfortable and then let the public move deer towards you.

When you move through a landscape it goes quiet. All the little birds stop cheeping. Deer know this - its the sign of a predator. If you sit still for 20 minutes, or might take an hour everything settles down, all the bird song comes back and the deer will be relaxed - this is when they pop out to feed.

After a shot, wait till everything settles again and often another beast pops out. You don’t want sound of a shot to become associated with a kill / man.

And if you can drag the beast well away from you favourite kill area and do the gralloch there. Or if you have a vehicle take it back and gralloch in the larder.

Leaving it ungralloched wont make a lot of difference to meat provided you had good shot placement. The rumen will swell a bit so you need to a bit more careful when opening the beast.

And in the summer time go to the highseat in the evening, take a sleeping bag and flask of coffee etc. when you loose shooting light, do your ablutions then curl up for a sleep and wake as it gets light and carry on. Saves all the faff of going home, getting to bed, getting up very early and going out again. I have done it a few times but you do need a highseat that has sufficient room to sleep in.

 

[25 Sharps]

Maybe the question is not as straightforward as I thought. It is relevant to me as to what the average area a woodland high seats covers and likewise, what area of woodland is covered on a average foot stalk. Seem a fairly simple question.

I have stalked area of conifer woodland where I may have properly covered say 100 acres, whilst sitting in a high seat I would have covered something like 1 to 2 acres. Other woodland as you say, is not possible to stalk on foot properly, but if enough views were taken I'd get an average.

The woodland I'm looking to get a comparison, covering 25 acres (that's observing 25 acres even though I'd walk further) of a 180 acre block, I can virtually guarantee to shoot deer. If I wanted to shoot both roe and sika during winter, an outing like this would usually give me at least 5 opportunities. If I'm only after sika, usually 2 or 3 opportunities to take deer.

On the other hand, if I decided to sit in any one of the high seats available for the same period of time, I suspect on average 1 or 2 opportunities. In essence, stalking of foot. I will see considerably more deer, have many more opportunities, whilst also giving me a much better idea of how many, and which parts of the woodland are favourite and any particular time.

Yes I shoot deer from high seats, but I've always been happier actually stalking. Currently I shoot maybe 75% stalking and 25% from a seat, but in the past, it has been a higher percentage on foot.

Maybe as I get older, it'll be more from a seat. I have a couple of clients out in a month or so that are around 75 yrs old and I suspect we will shoot more from a seat than on foot.

So to re-cap, it is only the area, an average woodland high seat covers, and the average amount of woodland covered on foot during an outing.

If sounds like you e already made up your mind!

 

[75]

Maybe the question is not as straightforward as I thought. It is relevant to me as to what the average area a woodland high seats covers and likewise, what area of woodland is covered on a average foot stalk. Seem a fairly simple question.

I'd say it's a really complicated question with no meaningful average. Too many variables to come up with a simple rule of thumb.

The woodland I'm looking to get a comparison, covering 25 acres (that's observing 25 acres even though I'd walk further) of a 180 acre block, I can virtually guarantee to shoot deer. If I wanted to shoot both roe and sika during winter, an outing like this would usually give me at least 5 opportunities. If I'm only after sika, usually 2 or 3 opportunities to take deer.

On the other hand, if I decided to sit in any one of the high seats available for the same period of time, I suspect on average 1 or 2 opportunities. In essence, stalking of foot. I will see considerably more deer, have many more opportunities, whilst also giving me a much better idea of how many, and which parts of the woodland are favourite and any particular time.

This is just an example of how you're being most effective on your particular piece of ground. It's not relevant to another bit of woodland elsewhere. For every example you provide like this one, someone will be able to provide a completely opposite example where a seat is more effective and results in more sightings and more deer.

Sorry, but I think this is all meaningless.

 

[Andy seatrout]

I’m guessing you don’t use thermal and NV?

I think it depends on the ground. If the under storey is thick and you are unlikely to be able to see through it to shoot or shoot safely then a high seat in a busy spot is more productive. If the woodland is fairly open like a lot of beech woodland is, then moving around and using a thermal can be more productive.

Agree with the comment above, in a small woodland moving around is pointless as you are likely to just clear the wood, a seat (or somewhere to stand and wait) will be more productive.

I do actually…..

 

[25 Sharps]

I do actually…..

Okay, I find being on the move with the ability to scan large areas with the thermal far, far, more productive for fox than sitting up in one positions. This is in open country though, not woodland.

 

[Andy seatrout]

Okay, I find being on the move with the ability to scan large areas with the thermal far, far, more productive for fox than sitting up in one positions. This is in open country though, not woodland.

I think we’re actually agreeing- we have woods in the borders of wales here, lots of small sheep fields patches of gorse….. see loads of foxes on foot and shoot more in numbers- also bump more by ‘moving’…..

In the high seat, you see less foxes by far, but 100% wind up dead…. I only go out about once a week/ twice maybe when there’s no moon…. I’ve had 14 foxes on foot since Mid-November…. Two from high seat, 12 on foot…..

Scared at least four preparing for the shot walking, scared none in high seat….

So with reference to the deer; maybe if you’re walking you’ll see more, but you’ll bump more, but depends on the ground - as a lot have said…. And on the skill of the stalker

 

[Andy seatrout]

Okay, I find being on the move with the ability to scan large areas with the thermal far, far, more productive for fox than sitting up in one positions. This is in open country though,

 

[25 Sharps]

I think we’re actually agreeing- we have woods in the borders of wales here, lots of small sheep fields patches of gorse….. see loads of foxes on foot and shoot more in numbers- also bump more by ‘moving’…..

In the high seat, you see less foxes by far, but 100% wind up dead…. I only go out about once a week/ twice maybe when there’s no moon…. I’ve had 14 foxes on foot since Mid-November…. Two from high seat, 12 on foot…..

Scared at least four preparing for the shot walking, scared none in high seat….

So with reference to the deer; maybe if you’re walking you’ll see more, but you’ll bump more, but depends on the ground - as a lot have said…. And on the skill of the dralker

I do most of my foxing on foot, very rarely do I scare a fox.

Funnily I’m off to west wales foxing soon, farm’s a lot like you describe.

 

[Andy seatrout]

I do most of my foxing on foot, very rarely do I scare a fox.

Funnily I’m off to west wales foxing soon, farm’s a lot like you describe.

If it’s less than ideal conditions I find it quite easy to scare them . full moon last week they can see you plain as day….. managed just one, didn’t even need to turn on the IR on the scope - there was enough moonlight to see and shoot without…. I go out if I feel like the walk etc, but if you’re casting a shadow ….

If it’s properly dark and there’s a bit of wind I’m reasonably effective, I try to get quite close 130 yards is the furthest I’ve shot one this season, mostly is less than 100 yards…