Why must deer always be the villain?

[Heym SR20]

An interesting article published by the BDS.

Why Must Deer Always Be the Villains? - The British Deer Society

This article highlights the need for site‑specific deer management & challenges simplistic narratives that blame deer for ecological decline

bds.org.uk

 

[Taff]

Because they are

 

[cjm1066]

To many deer, low venison prices is one side of a pendulum, higher vension prices stimulates more control and poaching. Management is that stable point in the middle that is so hard to sustain.

Deer by browsing, spreading nutrients and seed are an essential component of a healthy ecosystem, that's why fencing is also the wrong approach.

 

[Apthorpe]

To many deer, low venison prices is one side of a pendulum, higher vension prices stimulates more control and poaching. Management is that stable point in the middle that is so hard to sustain.

Deer by browsing, spreading nutrients and seed are an essential component of a healthy ecosystem, that's why fencing is also the wrong approach.

Good points, but it seems to me that "deer management" is itself quite an unhelpful description. At the most obvious level, there are three management interests which don't often align. Management for the environment, management to optimise the quality of the herd, and management for the venison market.

Management for the environment is very tricky. Largely because it is a conceit to think that humans understand the environment, partly because a lot of the "literature" produced on the topics is biased and politically motivated. As we all remember from the outstanding successes of Soviet environmental policies, allowing the influence of political motivation into science is a terrible error which we have also made, and for which our environment will pay the price - and already is.

 

[Shabz]

Good points, but it seems to me that "deer management" is itself quite an unhelpful description. At the most obvious level, there are three management interests which don't often align. Management for the environment, management to optimise the quality of the herd, and management for the venison market.

Management for the environment is very tricky. Largely because it is a conceit to think that humans understand the environment, partly because a lot of the "literature" produced on the topics is biased and politically motivated. As we all remember from the outstanding successes of Soviet environmental policies, allowing the influence of political motivation into science is a terrible error which we have also made, and for which our environment will pay the price - and already is.

Deer impacts on ecosystems are demonstrable and undeniable. You only need to put a fence up and you’ll see it. It’s not pen pushers, politicians or scientists making it up. It’s truth. It’s measurable.

It’s absolutely logical that if you have deer numbers that are the same as they are where natural predators exist, then you’ll get something similar in output. There are dozens of sites in Scotland where you can see the difference after deer numbers have been reduced.

 

[Apthorpe]

Deer impacts on ecosystems are demonstrable and undeniable. You only need to put a fence up and you’ll see it. It’s not pen pushers, politicians or scientists making it up. It’s truth. It’s measurable.

I know. So what? That has no bearing on what I wrote.

It’s absolutely logical that if you have deer numbers that are the same as they are where natural predators exist, then you’ll get something similar in output.

Logical, but obviously massively oversimplified and even within that there is a significant range.

There are dozens of sites in Scotland where you can see the difference after deer numbers have been reduced.

 

[Shabz]

Not oversimplified in the slightest. It’s just that simple. High numbers of deer where you want to encourage regeneration of habitats (woodlands for me) means that it’s not possible to encourage that regeneration. If you want lower deer numbers, then you need to kill some of them.

 

[Apthorpe]