BBC and deer - a refreshingly balanced piece…

[RF76]

 

[User100]

The topic of introducing wolves never seems to mention numbers.

A quick search says that across 28 countries of Europe, there are about 17000 wolves.

What percentage of our national deer cull would need to be taken by wolves for their contribution to be a valid argument for introduction? 30%?

If we work on the suggested cull of 750000 deer, 30% would be 225000. Would each wolf take about 25 deer a year? On that basis we would need 9000 wolves.

I don't have strong views either way on the introduction of wolves but realistically, the magnitude of population that the UK could support healthily isn't going to contribute massively to the required national cull.

 

[VSS]

Well, it's still £42.50 per kg, whether it's a joint or not. £42.50 per kg is exactly what it says.
As regards the gentleman's order; we can only speculate on his earnings and personal circumstances.
Low paid under privileged, do not normally buy produce of this price.

Either I'm very poor at making myself understood, or you're very poor at understanding.

 

[VSS]

Another thread already running on this.

 

[palmer_mike]

Either I'm very poor at making myself understood, or you're very poor at understanding.

I understood your point perfectly (and I’m no genius………)

 

[B&W FOX]

Another great idea :

Ban hunting with dogs and introduce hunting with wolves.

 

[VSS]

The topic of introducing wolves never seems to mention numbers.

A quick search says that across 28 countries of Europe, there are about 17000 wolves.

What percentage of our national deer cull would need to be taken by wolves for their contribution to be a valid argument for introduction? 30%?

If we work on the suggested cull of 750000 deer, 30% would be 225000. Would each wolf take about 25 deer a year? On that basis we would need 9000 wolves.

I don't have strong views either way on the introduction of wolves but realistically, the magnitude of population that the UK could support healthily isn't going to contribute massively to the required national cull.

It's a long time since I read up anything about wolves, but one thing I do recall reading somewhere is that the territorial range that a wolf pack requires is huge, to the extent that the available land area of the UK would only support something like two packs of half-a-dozen wolves.
(Ok, so I completely made up those numbers, but you get my gist I hope. Perhaps someone could look it up and correct me?)

 

[Border]

Coming from a country that has wolves, lynx and bears (as well as wolverine) introducing any of these apex predators into the british Isles in a non fenced area is just madness. It is not a viable solution to the deer over population and will create more problems than solutions.

 

[GR788]

A good article I thought and as many have said good to see a valences article from a mainstream news outlet!

 

[Charles S-J]

It's a long time since I read up anything about wolves, but one thing I do recall reading somewhere is that the territorial range that a wolf pack requires is huge, to the extent that the available land area of the UK would only support something like two packs of half-a-dozen wolves.
(Ok, so I completely made up those numbers, but you get my gist I hope. Perhaps someone could look it up and correct me?)

Some facts & figures here (from The Field Aug 25)

 

[David Barker]

Well the problem could have been sorted many years ago in scotland. RED DEER COMMISION, part of Naturescot have for the last 25 years set most of the recourses north to lower the estate red deer. Now we have red deer being out bred by Sika deer and that is being helped by Nature Scot. So red deer are at an all time low since the big count by the RDC and we have 500,000 or so roe deer uning a mock and cause far more damage to the environment than any other deer (Scotland) So untill the strategic deer group and Nature scot stop looking north there will be no change.

 

[angusb1]

I’d wager there’s a pretty wide spectrum of opinions amongst the readership of this forum, but perhaps the mainstream of stated opinion is more narrow. This isn’t always healthy. I’m not sure there’s much to dismiss in the BBC article at all. Apex predators - I’d be pretty confident we will see them here in the UK within a short period of time; lynx, under a decade, wolf perhaps a little more, bear harder to call. Do they eat people and their pets? No, as can be seen across all of Europe, where they roam without enclosures. Will they tackle the ‘deer problem’? Also no, not alone. But they will help massively. Not by predation alone, but by removing the safe hiding spaces that currently exist for species like fallow where landowners refuse to cull them. Predators will keep deer moving onto land that people on this forum shoot on - they would help us not hinder. Darting I’m more doubtful about tbh. The cost would be far more than that of culling. But again, if some organisations (membership based conservation bodies most likely) choose to use that approach on their land because their members don’t like killing, sobeit; if could be a part of the solution, if probably only a small one. At the risk of sounding totally sanctimonious, if we want people to understand our values and the true benefits of shooting as part of land management and rural income, then this sector needs to learn to better understand the viewpoints of others as well - and find ways of working with them. If we don’t then are in trouble as the popular numbers are stacked against us.

They kill plenty of livestock in Europe, around 30,000 - 40,000 beasts a year

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sou...IQFnoECEMQAQ&usg=AOvVaw1BIj8ci67yR3be1BVkFfFv

And they have killed pets in the USA where the population density is way lower than it is here. In the UK there is space for only one apex predator, man, and it just doesn't make sense to be feeding wolves, lynx and bears on livestock and pets when the livestock and the deer should be feeding humans.

 

[Mr Tree]

If each shot between 20 & 30 a year the population would be halved

Great, looks like I'm ahead of that.

 

[Mardler]

I’d wager there’s a pretty wide spectrum of opinions amongst the readership of this forum, but perhaps the mainstream of stated opinion is more narrow. This isn’t always healthy. I’m not sure there’s much to dismiss in the BBC article at all. Apex predators - I’d be pretty confident we will see them here in the UK within a short period of time; lynx, under a decade, wolf perhaps a little more, bear harder to call. Do they eat people and their pets? No, as can be seen across all of Europe, where they roam without enclosures. Will they tackle the ‘deer problem’? Also no, not alone. But they will help massively. Not by predation alone, but by removing the safe hiding spaces that currently exist for species like fallow where landowners refuse to cull them. Predators will keep deer moving onto land that people on this forum shoot on - they would help us not hinder. Darting I’m more doubtful about tbh. The cost would be far more than that of culling. But again, if some organisations (membership based conservation bodies most likely) choose to use that approach on their land because their members don’t like killing, sobeit; if could be a part of the solution, if probably only a small one. At the risk of sounding totally sanctimonious, if we want people to understand our values and the true benefits of shooting as part of land management and rural income, then this sector needs to learn to better understand the viewpoints of others as well - and find ways of working with them. If we don’t then are in trouble as the popular numbers are stacked against us.

In reply to your statement - "Do they eat people and their pets? No,..." you might want to check with Ursula Von der leyen and her pony - amazing how politicians and environmentalists change tack when personally affected by policies such as this

On a positive note, some lucky stalkers amongst us might get the opportunity to "control" lynx, wolves and bears in the not too distant future, if we're not too busy controlling the still present deer

Reintroduction doesn't historically go well and we end up trying to control the animal reintroduced - ask a Scottish beaver if you ever get the opportunity (I've left that one open for the budding comedians amongst us)

 

[ABL]

They kill plenty of livestock in Europe, around 30,000 - 40,000 beasts a year

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sou...IQFnoECEMQAQ&usg=AOvVaw1BIj8ci67yR3be1BVkFfFv

And they have killed pets in the USA where the population density is way lower than it is here. In the UK there is space for only one apex predator, man, and it just doesn't make sense to be feeding wolves, lynx and bears on livestock and pets when the livestock and the deer should be feeding humans.

Yup they will kill some livestock - they are predators after all. But the numbers are very small, usually supported under a compensation scheme and economically dwarfed by the benefits they provide. It’s amazing how anxious people in UK get about this, but when did it stop anyone here taking a holiday to France or Spain with the kids? Would it stop you going there?

 

[ABL]

In reply to your statement - "Do they eat people and their pets? No,..." you might want to check with Ursula Von der leyen and her pony - amazing how politicians and environmentalists change tack when personally affected by policies such as this

On a positive note, some lucky stalkers amongst us might get the opportunity to "control" lynx, wolves and bears in the not too distant future, if we're not too busy controlling the still present deer

Reintroduction doesn't historically go well and we end up trying to control the animal reintroduced - ask a Scottish beaver if you ever get the opportunity (I've left that one open for the budding comedians amongst us)

I’d take issue with that. Usually it’s the removal of species from a system or the introduction of a non-native that goes badly, not the reintroduction. We will need to to a decent evaluation of beaver in due course. Sure some will be frustrated by them - but plenty of people will be frustrated by having their homes flooded now that we knackered our river systems too.
As for management of predators that has to be part of the deal, just as it is on the continent. People need to live with wildlife and the needs of people will always rightly come first. But before we have a problem with wolves we need to have a few on the ground no!

 

[shakey jake]

I’d take issue with that. Usually it’s the removal of species from a system or the introduction of a non-native that goes badly, not the reintroduction. We will need to to a decent evaluation of beaver in due course. Sure some will be frustrated by them - but plenty of people will be frustrated by having their homes flooded now that we knackered our river systems too.
As for management of predators that has to be part of the deal, just as it is on the continent. People need to live with wildlife and the needs of people will always rightly come first. But before we have a problem with wolves we need to have a few on the ground no!

Wouldnt it make more sense to control the deer, than introduce a predator to sort a man made problem, other countries have more wild space and wolves cause conflict.
Hundreds of years of no wolves has set us up for a massive shock.
Compensating farmers for a few dead sheep is one thing, pet ponies would be bad press, paying for a few dead race horses near newmarket or cheltnam?
Where is that coming from?

 

[VSS]

.
Compensating farmers for a few dead sheep is one thing, pet ponies would be bad press, paying for a few dead race horses near newmarket or cheltnam?
Where is that coming from?

When it comes to compensation, a horse is a horse, regardless of whether it's a child's pet pony or a Cheltenham winner.

 

[shakey jake]

When it comes to compensation, a horse is a horse, regardless of whether it's a child's pet pony or a Cheltenham winner.

That doesnt really sound fair, surely it should be like a car? Same with live stock, lamb for market worth less than a prize winning ram.

 

[308rws]

As I’ve mentioned before on this topic, under UK law a deer comes into possession as the legal property of the landowner when it dies. There’s no way that a conservation charity or the Government can afford to compensate both landowners and livestock owners for deer and stock killed by an officially introduced apex predator - even at game dealer prices
Mind you at least in Scotland taxpayers would end up indirectly paying the sporting estate taxes on behalf of the landowner