You are assuming that in my observing of your approach it’s a criticism. Chill!
K
UK Government Launches UK Deer Management Strategy Consultation
- Thread starter wytonpjs
- Start date
K
Leec6.5
Well-Known Member
With my small bit, it is ingrained in them, the herd has followed the same route year in year out for the last 40 odd years, the farmer himself has told me that there has been the same tracks in the same place with the same gaps in the hedges since he was a teenager and he is now 55 odd!Sounds like your in a good spot to create a vacuum with sweet ground which sucks them in ready for your attention, a satellite helping control, get a few like minded folks dotted about will make a difference. Problem is the like minded and motivated who are prepared to get stuck in, so to speakback to the old extraction after the deed.
We keep coming back to this which affords me some comfort given my submissions to the DEFRA consultation.
K
Hefted deer, am sure more people could take advantage if culling was name of the game.
Leec6.5
Well-Known Member
With all due respect i am well chilled!
Well as chilled as I can be in this bloody heat
Yup, is a big stumbling block given health and safety, infrastructure of ground and the likes.
Happens time gain, you could shoot them but not extract given limitations and circumstances and no chopper that flys!
Funny also that the barstuards know their safe.
Think the lucky and the wise only need a roe sack or young Padawans to carry roe sack, ‘‘tis better, far better, imo
But in reality if others around you aren’t doing the same you are making no meaningful difference. It does at least give you something boast about online though I guess!
It’s nothing to do with shooting heavily pregnant females, they already are by the end of the doe/hind season. It’s about not leaving behind dependant young to starve to death if they happen to be born a little earlier than usual.
This is the kind of legislation that works because it benefits the landowner for deer numbers to be controlled.
Last edited:
It wouldn't work here in the UK. Lease areas are too small. One herd of fallow may wander across multiple land holdings in a single night, so unless the deer on all of those land holdings are managed by one lease holder (which is unlikely) how do you determine who is the person responsible for paying compensation?
The only possible way for such a scheme to work would be for all of the leaseholders in a particular region to be overseen by a local organisation, to which they pay a membership fee, and for any compensation claims within that region to be paid out by the organisation. But I can't see that being a popular option, because effectively the organisation would be the lease holder over multiple land holdings, and sub-lease to individual stalkers. Corruption, elitism and the old boys' club would soon dominate, and the smaller, less well-off recreational stalker would lose his ground.
Last edited:
ChesterP
Well-Known Member
Only just responded to this. Completed the questionnaire and there's a few worrying leading questions in there which perhaps suggest that empire building and forced membership with cards etc might be something that creeps in which I am strongly opposed to. Agree that more must be done to hammer non native, especially muntjac.
Agree that one standard for all is observed but don't see the need for this to mean another new course or regulatory burden on shooters. Make it localised and leave shooters to decide between say DSC1 as a bare minimum (no need for anything more) to prevent this becoming about industry or organisation rubbing their hands in glee. Those already qualified should be left well alone. It may well be time to formalise licensing which for many areas stipulate informally DSC1 or equivalent to get deer on their certs.
Malc hit the one particular nail on the head which needed saying, and that's that police need to get their acts together and end this ridiculous 12 months or longer for renewals. 8 weeks mandatory, increase funds to licencing teams who are over burdened as it is and stop the nonsense of NHS refusing to take part in the GP reports. Make it mandatory for GP practices to provide the info needed and if necessary add this to the licensing fee. I'd rather pay an extra 60 quid for my renewal than be made wait a year and have to go round the houses to get someone to do the GP report. It's farcical, inefficient and in no ones interests. This alone will encourage more into deer management be it recreational or organisational. It will make a positive difference to deer management as currently a lot of people are handing up their boots and selling their gear as they are getting fed up withy the current situation.
Landowners MUST be left in control over who they have on their land controlling deer. Tyranny by stealth is not welcomed.
Agree that one standard for all is observed but don't see the need for this to mean another new course or regulatory burden on shooters. Make it localised and leave shooters to decide between say DSC1 as a bare minimum (no need for anything more) to prevent this becoming about industry or organisation rubbing their hands in glee. Those already qualified should be left well alone. It may well be time to formalise licensing which for many areas stipulate informally DSC1 or equivalent to get deer on their certs.
Malc hit the one particular nail on the head which needed saying, and that's that police need to get their acts together and end this ridiculous 12 months or longer for renewals. 8 weeks mandatory, increase funds to licencing teams who are over burdened as it is and stop the nonsense of NHS refusing to take part in the GP reports. Make it mandatory for GP practices to provide the info needed and if necessary add this to the licensing fee. I'd rather pay an extra 60 quid for my renewal than be made wait a year and have to go round the houses to get someone to do the GP report. It's farcical, inefficient and in no ones interests. This alone will encourage more into deer management be it recreational or organisational. It will make a positive difference to deer management as currently a lot of people are handing up their boots and selling their gear as they are getting fed up withy the current situation.
Landowners MUST be left in control over who they have on their land controlling deer. Tyranny by stealth is not welcomed.
I would say landowners or agricultural occupiers must be left in control. That includes tenant farmers, who shouldn't have to put up with damage to their crops by deer if the landowner isn't doing anything about it. Also, in my opinion, in situations where freehold sporting rights have been separated from landownership, it should still be the landowner or agricultural occupier who calls the shots on deer management, not the owner of the sporting rights.
nun_hunter
Well-Known Member
When I filled out the consultation I too suggested the compensation aspect from landowners or leaseholders.
Bow hunting if regulated could open up the longer hours and extend the season for females. My logic for this is that you have to be closer so would potentially be in a better position to see later into darker settings, its much quieter and the ability to observe and select does without young followers should be increased.
I appreciate this is not a view shared by many on here and is highly unlikely to ever happen but I think the principle is sound. Give longer seasons for bows such as in the USA plus it would/could encourage more stalkers to get out.
It doesn't have to be all about a handful of professionals killing all the deer but maybe more individuals taking what they want or need to eat. Again this works well in many other countries.
Rarely shoot a muntjac doe that isnt pregnant. Even measured the foetus for records at one time.
Ruby Tuesday 2
Well-Known Member
I've joined this party a bit late and have read the whole thread this morning, ironically probably shouldn't have waisted the hour and gone out to cull another fallow from my ground
Leec6.5
Well-Known Member
Similar threads
