I think a tag system can absolutely work, but as a maintenance cull, not a reduction cull.
Tell me again why public access stalking isn’t a viable option
- Thread starter Rake Aboot
- Start date
TundB
Well-Known Member
No need to look for US system which has different dynamics than us here, just look how they do this in EU countries properly. There are local hunting clubs everywhere managing deer and boar in public lands. They organize outings, train people and sell venison and wild boar local businesses and report their activities to government agencies. It works.
Dunwaters
Well-Known Member
Why do you need tags?
If the goal is reduction, all deer are legitimate targets in season and the stalker is responsible for extraction. There should be no Trophy fees, you take what you get.
If the goal is maintenance, stop access once the cull is achieved.
I swear to God, some of you guys could complicate switching on a kettle, and quite a few of you would approve of the restrictions.
By tag I simply mean ‘public access system’ - the ‘tag’ is the permit to shoot.
There is plenty of data on this globally. Maintenance cull: no problem. You work out number of deer needing shot, issue the required number of permits/tags and off you go.
Reduction cull? No. If you need hundreds shot quickly, it simply doesn’t work. This is not personal belief - there is good empirical data on this.
It does work - but is a completely different model again, and one that would require a fundamental cultural change here, by both stalkers and landowners.
It’s essentially a centralised process where the individual hunter has little to no autonomy, and where the landowner (when this is not the state) has limited influence. Good luck persuading people here to go for that!
TundB
Well-Known Member
In my opinion an individual shouldn’t have complete autonomy in a public land anyway. Managing deer is team work, especially for larger species.
The land that started this thread is a private estate, and the vast bulk of land in the UK is private.
Where culling is done on ‘public’ land, such as on Forestry and Land Scotland land, it’s primarily done by teams of paid contractors working to mandated cull targets.
Heym SR20
Well-Known Member
Here’s my take on Scottish Stalking. When I first started stalking about 40 odd years ago, it was still very much old school. The deer herd was managed by stalkers, or in case of Forestry, forestry rangers who absolutely knew their ground. In many cases they were born on it and the stalkers had been there for generations. Stalkers, gamekeepers etc did much much more than just shoot deer, in many cases they were stewards of the estate and pretty much ran the place alongside the house keeper who ran the house.
The estates all had various different income streams. Capital was provided by the owners - usually family, and often the estate was part of a much larger group of estates / businesses. But the core income for most was sporing rents coming from long standing repeat lettings. The same families would take the estate for the same two weeks every year, and when the old man died his children took over. Part of the let would be the sport - stalking, fishing, shooting and in the evening- ensuring thst your offspring married other appropriate offspring so that you could continue fishing all your life.
Estates value was based on the quality of stalkkng, shooting and fishing and it was based on the long term average over several years. So fundamentally estates were run to produce a long term sustainable yeald of quality. Sales of venison provide another source of income to offset the costs.
In the off season during the hind cull was an opportunity for younger, and much less wealthy to get out stalking. In my experience there would often be several stalkers out in a coordinated fashion, and I remember days when we shot 20 hinds and calves between three or four of us, it was hard work, but if you were capable you got asked back.
It was well understood that deer numbers etc needed to be kept well in balance. Estates, and neighbouring stalkers all communicated - at times positively, other times more in open warfare.
But the whole system was pretty much self funding.
Fast forward to today. Many of the estates are long gone and all the cornerstone deer stalkers are doing other things. The FLS land has got rid of most of its employed long term staff, replaced with contractors used on the basis of competative tenders.
And decisions are being taken from a desk hundreds of miles away based on data, that is at best a guesstimate and takes no or little account of the overall situation.
And they are using a one size fits all approach, with very little account of what is actually on the ground.
There is no reason why tag systems couldn’t work - they do elsewhere in the world. But you still need a good decision making process to control tags which will require staff on the ground who actually know what is going on.
Tag systems probably also only really work if the meat remains with the hunter. In most other parts of the world hunting is either in a communal manner with lots of people there to get dead animals to a point of process.
Or the animal is cut up where it falls and the meat is carried out on foot back to an access point.
This does mean a change in mindset as all the bones, skin etc is left on the hill and woods to rot away and return the nutrients to the soil. A rotting rib cage may be a little unpleasant for town folk, but frankly its part of nature.
I have been lucky enough to have allowed to stalk on estates in the hills on the basis that I am shooting cull stags and recovering the meat on foot. These have been into areas where most of the main stalking doesn’t happen. Usually its been on a non cash basis, or I have paid approx £100 for the carcass.
The estates all had various different income streams. Capital was provided by the owners - usually family, and often the estate was part of a much larger group of estates / businesses. But the core income for most was sporing rents coming from long standing repeat lettings. The same families would take the estate for the same two weeks every year, and when the old man died his children took over. Part of the let would be the sport - stalking, fishing, shooting and in the evening- ensuring thst your offspring married other appropriate offspring so that you could continue fishing all your life.
Estates value was based on the quality of stalkkng, shooting and fishing and it was based on the long term average over several years. So fundamentally estates were run to produce a long term sustainable yeald of quality. Sales of venison provide another source of income to offset the costs.
In the off season during the hind cull was an opportunity for younger, and much less wealthy to get out stalking. In my experience there would often be several stalkers out in a coordinated fashion, and I remember days when we shot 20 hinds and calves between three or four of us, it was hard work, but if you were capable you got asked back.
It was well understood that deer numbers etc needed to be kept well in balance. Estates, and neighbouring stalkers all communicated - at times positively, other times more in open warfare.
But the whole system was pretty much self funding.
Fast forward to today. Many of the estates are long gone and all the cornerstone deer stalkers are doing other things. The FLS land has got rid of most of its employed long term staff, replaced with contractors used on the basis of competative tenders.
And decisions are being taken from a desk hundreds of miles away based on data, that is at best a guesstimate and takes no or little account of the overall situation.
And they are using a one size fits all approach, with very little account of what is actually on the ground.
There is no reason why tag systems couldn’t work - they do elsewhere in the world. But you still need a good decision making process to control tags which will require staff on the ground who actually know what is going on.
Tag systems probably also only really work if the meat remains with the hunter. In most other parts of the world hunting is either in a communal manner with lots of people there to get dead animals to a point of process.
Or the animal is cut up where it falls and the meat is carried out on foot back to an access point.
This does mean a change in mindset as all the bones, skin etc is left on the hill and woods to rot away and return the nutrients to the soil. A rotting rib cage may be a little unpleasant for town folk, but frankly its part of nature.
I have been lucky enough to have allowed to stalk on estates in the hills on the basis that I am shooting cull stags and recovering the meat on foot. These have been into areas where most of the main stalking doesn’t happen. Usually its been on a non cash basis, or I have paid approx £100 for the carcass.
but it is not say for Wildfowling on WWT foreshore or the Eden estuary to give two examples.... both a permit for certain days, must have licence, insurance and give a bag record to confirm what was harvested... limit on numbers of people on each day
Having spent time in New Zealand stalking there public land, there solutiom works well however the areas are vast, you register to use DOC land and they stipulate what can be used but gives them an idea of the amount of people using the area ect, you still have the option of private blocks using the old who you know method or paying upfront with prior booking, however they are fond of blanketing the area in 1080 on a regular basis unfortunately!
I read the comments here fairly positively. I have been keen a tag system for years. I have posted periodically in support of this on SD and in previous years all the responses were variations on "it'll never work."
I think we have to try something else. The Scottish governments approach of contractors shooting deer on sight, out of season, at night etc. doesn't sit well with me.
I think we have to try something else. The Scottish governments approach of contractors shooting deer on sight, out of season, at night etc. doesn't sit well with me.
Freeforester
Well-Known Member
Over twelve years ago I put a thoroughly prepared scheme proposal into the hands of the then Wildlife Ranger Manager* for North of Scotland.
Torpor - it’s still a thing - and even glaciers have a ‘working at pace’ attitude.
*Lang since retired…
Last edited:
I'm becoming acquainted with the Romanian system. All land is divided up into hunting associations. Each hunting association is managed by a wildlife ranger ( a full-time government employee). If you want to hunt you pass the tests and join the association of your choice for a fee of 300 euros a year and for that you get access to fur and feather hunting, stalking and driven. There are many species to hunt. The system is the same for everyone, if the landowner wants to hunt on his own land he has to join the relevant association just like anyone else. No shot fees, trophy fees or any other ludicrous expenses and if you want any meat it's yours.
CH
Not such an attractive system if you happen to be a landowner.
Sporting rights should go with land ownership, in my opinion.
It is a total pain in the arse when they are separated, and I speak from personal experience.
But you’re ok with a farmer paying someone to shoot foxes or rabbits on their land at night?
I'm still hopeful! I think the initiative would have to come from NatureScot (setting policy for deer control) or BDS.
Rake Aboot
Well-Known Member
Farmer paying someone ????
Similar threads
